Use of Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction (MBIR) in reduced-dose CT for routine follow-up of patients with malignant lymphoma: dose savings, image quality and phantom study

Hérin, Edouard; Gardavaud, François; Chiaradia, M.; Beaussart, Pauline; Richard, Patrick; Cavet, Madeleine; Deux, Jean-François; Haı̈oun, Corinne; Itti, Emmanuel; Rahmouni, Alain; Luciani, Alain

doi:10.1007/s00330-015-3656-9

Cited by 38 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As previously reported (6)(7)(8)(9)13,14,16,18,19,(21)(22)(23)(26)(27)(28)(29), IR algorithms enable a lower radiation dose for body CT acquisitions while preserving image quality. An evaluation of the 50% dose CT protocol by our four readers confirmed these findings, as diagnostic confidence was maintained and the subjective image quality of the reduced-dose images was still above average when compared to the reference, 100% dose images.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…The potential for dose reduction using IR while preserving image quality has already been the subject of several publications (8,11,(13)(14)(15)(16)(17), but only a few studies have analyzed both chest and abdominal CT images (10,(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24) and none have focused on young patients. As young patients represent the most radiosensitive population (25), they most urgently require an optimized radiation exposure, especially when they frequently undergo CT examinations, such as for follow-up of oncological disease.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Iterative Reconstructions in Reduced-Dose CT

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Iterative Reconstructions in Reduced-Dose CT

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, FBP has been found to have inferior image quality as compared to both MBIR and hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) and that MBIR yielded superior image quality to HIR for the cross‐sectional view . A study conducted by Hèrin et al concluded that MBIR reconstructions of reduced‐dose CT and FBP reconstruction of standard‐dose CT both obtained the same low contrast detectability on a phantom . This suggests that model‐based iterative reconstruction methods have the potential to perform better than FBP in terms of overall image quality and thus may impact Radiation Oncology‐related tasks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of CT reconstruction algorithm on auto‐segmentation performance

Miller

Mittelstaedt²,

Black

et al. 2019

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Model‐based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) reduces CT imaging dose while maintaining image quality. However, MBIR reduces noise while preserving edges which may impact intensity‐based tasks such as auto‐segmentation. This work evaluates the sensitivity of an auto‐contouring prostate atlas across multiple MBIR reconstruction protocols and benchmarks the results against filtered back projection (FBP). Images were created from raw projection data for 11 prostate cancer cases using FBP and nine different MBIR reconstructions (3 protocols/3 noise reduction levels) yielding 10 reconstructions/patient. Five bony structures, bladder, rectum, prostate, and seminal vesicles (SVs) were segmented using an auto‐segmentation pipeline that renders 3D binary masks for analysis. Performance was evaluated for volume percent difference (VPD) and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), using FBP as the gold standard. Nonparametric Friedman tests plus post hoc all pairwise comparisons were employed to test for significant differences (P < 0.05) for soft tissue organs and protocol/level combinations. A physician performed qualitative grading of 396 MBIR contours across the prostate, bladder, SVs, and rectum in comparison to FBP using a six‐point scale. MBIR contours agreed with FBP for bony anatomy (DSC ≥ 0.98), bladder (DSC ≥ 0.94, VPD < 8.5%), and prostate (DSC = 0.94 ± 0.03, VPD = 4.50 ± 4.77% (range: 0.07–26.39%). Increased variability was observed for rectum (VPD = 7.50 ± 7.56% and DSC = 0.90 ± 0.08) and SVs (VPD and DSC of 8.23 ± 9.86% range (0.00–35.80%) and 0.87 ± 0.11, respectively). Over the all protocol/level comparisons, a significant difference was observed for the prostate VPD between BSPL1 and BSTL2 (adjusted P‐value = 0.039). Nevertheless, 300 of 396 (75.8%) of the four soft tissue structures using MBIR were graded as equivalent or better than FBP, suggesting that MBIR offered potential improvements in auto‐segmentation performance when compared to FBP. Future work may involve tuning organ‐specific MBIR parameters to further improve auto‐segmentation performance. Running title: Impact of CT Reconstruction Algorithm on Auto‐segmentation Performance.

show abstract

“…21,22 However, many technologic advances in CT techniques, such as iterative reconstruction, have been demonstrated to markedly improve the performance of low-dose CT acquisition. 23,24 Additionally, lowering tube voltage enhances the contrast attenuation in target vessels, thus maintaining a diagnostic CNR. As observed in our study, the mean image noise of the 80-kVp CTA protocol was statistically higher than that of the 120-kVp protocol; however, the image quality of the 80-kVp CTA protocol did not decrease despite the increase in noise.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%