CT image quality in sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction phantom study - is there a point of diminishing returns?

Comparison of quantitative image quality of cardiac computed tomography between raw-data-based and model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms with an emphasis on image sharpness

BACKGROUND

Image sharpness is commonly degraded on cardiac CT images reconstructed using iterative reconstruction algorithms.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the image quality of cardiac CT between raw-data-based and model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms developed by the same CT vendor in children and young adults with congenital heart disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 29 patients with congenital heart disease, we reconstructed 39 cardiac CT datasets using raw-data-based and model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms. We performed quantitative analysis of image sharpness using distance_25-75% and angle_25-75% on a line density profile across an edge of the descending thoracic aorta in addition to CT attenuation, image noise, signal-to-noise ratio and contrast-to-noise ratio. We compared these quantitative image-quality measures between the two algorithms.

RESULTS

CT attenuation did not show significant differences between the algorithms (P>0.05) except in the aorta. Image noise was small but significantly higher in the model-based algorithm than in the raw-data-based algorithm (4.8±2.3 Hounsfield units [HU] vs. 4.7±2.1 HU, P<0.014). Signal-to-noise ratio (110.2±50.9 vs. 108.4±50.4, P=0.050) and contrast-to-noise ratio (91.0±45.7 vs. 89.6±45.1, P=0.063) showed marginal significance between the two algorithms. The model-based algorithm showed a significantly smaller distance_25-75% (1.4±0.4 mm vs. 1.6±0.3 mm, P<0.001) and a significantly higher angle_25-75% (77.0±4.3° vs. 74.1±5.7°, P<0.001) than the raw-data-based algorithm.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the raw-data-based algorithm, the model-based iterative reconstruction algorithm demonstrated better image sharpness and higher image noise on cardiac CT in patients with congenital heart disease.

Application of Vendor-Neutral Iterative Reconstruction Technique to Pediatric Abdominal Computed Tomography

Objective

To compare image qualities between vendor-neutral and vendor-specific hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR) techniques for abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) in young patients.

Materials and Methods

In phantom study, we used an anthropomorphic pediatric phantom, age-equivalent to 5-year-old, and reconstructed CT data using traditional filtered back projection (FBP), vendor-specific and vendor-neutral IR techniques (ClariCT; ClariPI) in various radiation doses. Noise, low-contrast detectability and subjective spatial resolution were compared between FBP, vendor-specific (i.e., iDose1 to 5; Philips Healthcare), and vendor-neutral (i.e., ClariCT1 to 5) IR techniques in phantom. In 43 patients (median, 14 years; age range 1–19 years), noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and qualitative image quality scores of abdominopelvic CT were compared between FBP, iDose level 4 (iDose4), and ClariCT level 2 (ClariCT2), which showed most similar image quality to clinically used vendor-specific IR images (i.e., iDose4) in phantom study. Noise, CNR, and qualitative imaging scores were compared using one-way repeated measure analysis of variance.

Results

In phantom study, ClariCT2 showed noise level similar to iDose4 (14.68–7.66 Hounsfield unit [HU] vs. 14.78–6.99 HU at CT dose index volume range of 0.8–3.8 mGy). Subjective low-contrast detectability and spatial resolution were similar between ClariCT2 and iDose4. In clinical study, ClariCT2 was equivalent to iDose4 for noise (14.26–17.33 vs. 16.01–18.90) and CNR (3.55–5.24 vs. 3.20–4.60) (p > 0.05). For qualitative imaging scores, the overall image quality ([reader 1, reader 2]; 2.74 vs. 2.07, 3.02 vs. 2.28) and noise (2.88 vs. 2.23, 2.93 vs. 2.33) of ClariCT2 were superior to those of FBP (p < 0.05), and not different from those of iDose4 (2.74 vs. 2.72, 3.02 vs. 2.98; 2.88 vs. 2.77, 2.93 vs. 2.86) (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Vendor-neutral IR technique shows image quality similar to that of clinically used vendor-specific hybrid IR technique for abdominopelvic CT in young patients.

User-Friendly Vendor-Specific Guideline for Pediatric Cardiothoracic Computed Tomography Provided by the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging Congenital Heart Disease Study Group: Part 1. Imaging Techniques

Optimal performance of pediatric cardiothoracic computed tomography (CT) is technically challenging and may need different approaches for different types of CT scanners. To meet the technical demands and improve clinical standards, a practical, user-friendly, and vendor-specific guideline for pediatric cardiothoracic CT needs to be developed for children with congenital heart disease (CHD). In this article, we have attempted to describe such guideline based on the consensus of experts in the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging CHD Study Group. This first part describes the imaging techniques of pediatric cardiothoracic CT, and it includes recommendations for patient preparation, scan techniques, radiation dose, intravenous injection protocol, post-processing, and vendor-specific protocols.

Quantitative Image Quality and Histogram-Based Evaluations of an Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm at Low-to-Ultralow Radiation Dose Levels: A Phantom Study in Chest CT

Objective

To describe the quantitative image quality and histogram-based evaluation of an iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithm in chest computed tomography (CT) scans at low-to-ultralow CT radiation dose levels.

Materials and Methods

In an adult anthropomorphic phantom, chest CT scans were performed with 128-section dual-source CT at 70, 80, 100, 120, and 140 kVp, and the reference (3.4 mGy in volume CT Dose Index [CTDI_vol]), 30%-, 60%-, and 90%-reduced radiation dose levels (2.4, 1.4, and 0.3 mGy). The CT images were reconstructed by using filtered back projection (FBP) algorithms and IR algorithm with strengths 1, 3, and 5. Image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were statistically compared between different dose levels, tube voltages, and reconstruction algorithms. Moreover, histograms of subtraction images before and after standardization in x- and y-axes were visually compared.

Results

Compared with FBP images, IR images with strengths 1, 3, and 5 demonstrated image noise reduction up to 49.1%, SNR increase up to 100.7%, and CNR increase up to 67.3%. Noteworthy image quality degradations on IR images including a 184.9% increase in image noise, 63.0% decrease in SNR, and 51.3% decrease in CNR, and were shown between 60% and 90% reduced levels of radiation dose (p < 0.0001). Subtraction histograms between FBP and IR images showed progressively increased dispersion with increased IR strength and increased dose reduction. After standardization, the histograms appeared deviated and ragged between FBP images and IR images with strength 3 or 5, but almost normally-distributed between FBP images and IR images with strength 1.

Conclusion

The IR algorithm may be used to save radiation doses without substantial image quality degradation in chest CT scanning of the adult anthropomorphic phantom, down to approximately 1.4 mGy in CTDI_vol (60% reduced dose).