Cargando…
Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to find the lowest possible tube current and the optimal iterative reconstruction (IR) strength in abdominal imaging. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Reconstruction software was used to insert noise, simulating the use of a lower tube current. A semi-anthropomorphic abdomi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8989341/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35390018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266194 |
_version_ | 1784683149541769216 |
---|---|
author | Martens, Bibi Bosschee, Joris G. A. Van Kuijk, Sander M. J. Jeukens, Cécile R. L. P. N. Brauer, Maikel T. H. Wildberger, Joachim E. Mihl, Casper |
author_facet | Martens, Bibi Bosschee, Joris G. A. Van Kuijk, Sander M. J. Jeukens, Cécile R. L. P. N. Brauer, Maikel T. H. Wildberger, Joachim E. Mihl, Casper |
author_sort | Martens, Bibi |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to find the lowest possible tube current and the optimal iterative reconstruction (IR) strength in abdominal imaging. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Reconstruction software was used to insert noise, simulating the use of a lower tube current. A semi-anthropomorphic abdominal phantom (Quality Assurance in Radiology and Medicine, QSA-543, Moehrendorf, Germany) was used to validate the performance of the ReconCT software (S1 Appendix). Thirty abdominal CT scans performed with a standard protocol (120 kV(ref), 150 mAs(ref)) scanned at 90 kV, with dedicated contrast media (CM) injection software were selected. There were no other in- or exclusion criteria. The software was used to insert noise as if the scans were performed with 90, 80, 70 and 60% of the full dose. Consequently, the different scans were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and IR strength 2, 3 and 4. Both objective (e.g. Hounsfield units [HU], signal to noise ratio [SNR] and contrast to noise ratio [CNR]) and subjective image quality were evaluated. In addition, lesion detection was graded by two radiologists in consensus in another 30 scans (identical scan protocol) with various liver lesions, reconstructed with IR 3, 4 and 5. RESULTS: A tube current of 60% still led to diagnostic objective image quality (e.g. SNR and CNR) when IR strength 3 or 4 were used. IR strength 4 was preferred for lesion detection. The subjective image quality was rated highest for the scans performed at 90% with IR 4. CONCLUSION: A tube current reduction of 10–40% is possible in case IR 4 is used, leading to the highest image quality (10%) or still diagnostic image quality (40%), shown by a pairwise comparison in the same patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8989341 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89893412022-04-08 Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack Martens, Bibi Bosschee, Joris G. A. Van Kuijk, Sander M. J. Jeukens, Cécile R. L. P. N. Brauer, Maikel T. H. Wildberger, Joachim E. Mihl, Casper PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to find the lowest possible tube current and the optimal iterative reconstruction (IR) strength in abdominal imaging. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Reconstruction software was used to insert noise, simulating the use of a lower tube current. A semi-anthropomorphic abdominal phantom (Quality Assurance in Radiology and Medicine, QSA-543, Moehrendorf, Germany) was used to validate the performance of the ReconCT software (S1 Appendix). Thirty abdominal CT scans performed with a standard protocol (120 kV(ref), 150 mAs(ref)) scanned at 90 kV, with dedicated contrast media (CM) injection software were selected. There were no other in- or exclusion criteria. The software was used to insert noise as if the scans were performed with 90, 80, 70 and 60% of the full dose. Consequently, the different scans were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and IR strength 2, 3 and 4. Both objective (e.g. Hounsfield units [HU], signal to noise ratio [SNR] and contrast to noise ratio [CNR]) and subjective image quality were evaluated. In addition, lesion detection was graded by two radiologists in consensus in another 30 scans (identical scan protocol) with various liver lesions, reconstructed with IR 3, 4 and 5. RESULTS: A tube current of 60% still led to diagnostic objective image quality (e.g. SNR and CNR) when IR strength 3 or 4 were used. IR strength 4 was preferred for lesion detection. The subjective image quality was rated highest for the scans performed at 90% with IR 4. CONCLUSION: A tube current reduction of 10–40% is possible in case IR 4 is used, leading to the highest image quality (10%) or still diagnostic image quality (40%), shown by a pairwise comparison in the same patients. Public Library of Science 2022-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8989341/ /pubmed/35390018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266194 Text en © 2022 Martens et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Martens, Bibi Bosschee, Joris G. A. Van Kuijk, Sander M. J. Jeukens, Cécile R. L. P. N. Brauer, Maikel T. H. Wildberger, Joachim E. Mihl, Casper Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack |
title | Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack |
title_full | Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack |
title_fullStr | Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack |
title_full_unstemmed | Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack |
title_short | Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack |
title_sort | finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8989341/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35390018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266194 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT martensbibi findingtheoptimaltubecurrentanditerativereconstructionstrengthinliverimagingtwoneedlesinonehaystack AT bosscheejorisga findingtheoptimaltubecurrentanditerativereconstructionstrengthinliverimagingtwoneedlesinonehaystack AT vankuijksandermj findingtheoptimaltubecurrentanditerativereconstructionstrengthinliverimagingtwoneedlesinonehaystack AT jeukenscecilerlpn findingtheoptimaltubecurrentanditerativereconstructionstrengthinliverimagingtwoneedlesinonehaystack AT brauermaikelth findingtheoptimaltubecurrentanditerativereconstructionstrengthinliverimagingtwoneedlesinonehaystack AT wildbergerjoachime findingtheoptimaltubecurrentanditerativereconstructionstrengthinliverimagingtwoneedlesinonehaystack AT mihlcasper findingtheoptimaltubecurrentanditerativereconstructionstrengthinliverimagingtwoneedlesinonehaystack |