Comparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi.
Comparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s13244-013-0273-5
复制
发表时间：
2013-10
影响因子：
4.7
通讯作者：
Roobottom, Carl A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Vardhanabhuti, Varut;Ilyas, Sumaira;Gutteridge, Catherine;Freeman, Simon J;Roobottom, Carl A
比较在CT肾脏/输尿管/膀胱（KUB）检查中使用滤波反投影（FBP）、自适应统计迭代重建（ASIR）和基于模型的迭代重建（MBIR）技术采集的计算机断层扫描（CT）图像的图像质量。18例患者在我们机构接受了标准方案CT KUB。使用FBP、ASIR和MBIR重建相同的原始数据。使用1（最佳）至5（最差）评分系统评估客观[肾脏的平均图像噪声、对比度噪声比（CNR）和皮下脂肪的平均衰减值]和主观图像参数（图像噪声、图像对比度、肾脏/输尿管/膀胱的总体可见性、小结构的可见性和总体诊断置信度）。客观图像测量结果显示，MBIR技术的图像噪声明显减少，CNR较高，脂肪衰减值相同（P < 0.05）。MBIR在所有主观图像参数中得分最高（P < 0.001），MBIR的平均值范围为2.05-2.73，ASIR为2.95-3.10，FBP为3.08-3.31。ASIR组与MBIR组比较，差异有统计学意义（P <0.05），而DBP组与ASIR组比较差异无统计学意义（P> 0.05）。平均有效剂量为3 mSv。与ASIR和FBP CT KUB检查相比，MBIR显示出上级降噪和图像质量改善（客观和主观分析）。CT中有许多重建选项。·新的基于模型的迭代重建（MBIR）显示出最小的噪声和最佳的图像质量。·对于肾脏/输尿管/膀胱的CT，应使用MBIR（如果可用）。·应继续进行进一步研究，以减少剂量，同时保持图像质量。
To compare image quality on computed tomographic (CT) images acquired with filtered back-projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) techniques in CT kidney/ureter/bladder (KUB) examination. Eighteen patients underwent standard protocol CT KUB at our institution. The same raw data were reconstructed using FBP, ASIR and MBIR. Objective [mean image noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for kidney and mean attenuation values of subcutaneous fat] and subjective image parameters (image noise, image contrast, overall visibility of kidneys/ureters/bladder, visibility of small structures, and overall diagnostic confidence) were assessed using a scoring system from 1 (best) to 5 (worst). Objective image measurements revealed significantly less image noise and higher CNR and the same fat attenuation values for the MBIR technique (P < 0.05). MBIR scored best in all the subjective image parameters (P < 0.001) with averages ranging between 2.05–2.73 for MBIR, 2.95–3.10 for ASIR and 3.08–3.31 for FBP. No significant difference was observed between FBP and ASIR (P > 0.05), while there was a significant difference between ASIR vs. MBIR (P < 0.05). The mean effective dose was 3 mSv. MBIR shows superior reduction in noise and improved image quality (both objective and subjective analysis) compared with ASIR and FBP CT KUB examinations. • There are many reconstruction options in CT. • Novel model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) showed the least noise and optimal image quality. • For CT of the kidneys/ureters/bladder, MBIR should be utilised, if available. • Further studies to reduce the dose while maintaining image quality should be pursued.