Image quality assessment of standard- and low-dose chest CT using filtered back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and novel model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms

The purpose of this article is to compare image quality between filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) at standard dose and two preselected low-dose scans. Thirty patients (16 men and 14 women; mean age, 6...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	American journal of roentgenology (1976) Vol. 200; no. 3; p. 545
Main Authors:	Vardhanabhuti, Varut, Loader, Robert J, Mitchell, Grant R, Riordan, Richard D, Roobottom, Carl A
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	United States 01.03.2013
Subjects:	Aged Aged, 80 and over Algorithms Data Interpretation, Statistical Female Humans Male Middle Aged Radiation Dosage Radiation Protection - methods Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods Radiography, Thoracic - methods Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Thoracic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods
ISSN:	1546-3141, 1546-3141
Online Access:	Get more information
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Abstract	The purpose of this article is to compare image quality between filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) at standard dose and two preselected low-dose scans. Thirty patients (16 men and 14 women; mean age, 67 years) were prospectively recruited. Patients underwent three scans (one standard-dose scan and two low-dose scans at noise indexes [NIs] of 33, 60, and 70, respectively). All three scans were reconstructed with FBP, ASIR, and MBIR. Objective and subjective image qualities were compared. Dose-length products and effective doses for each scans were recorded. Mean image noise and attenuation values were compared between different reconstruction algorithms using repeated-measures analysis of variance and paired Student t tests. The interobserver variation between the two radiologists for subjective image quality and lesion assessment was estimated by using weighted kappa statistics. Objective image analysis supports significant noise reduction with low-dose scans using the MBIR technique (p < 0.05). There was no significant change in mean CT numbers between different reconstructions (p > 0.05). Subjective analysis reveals no significant difference between image quality and diagnostic confidence between low-dose MBIR scans compared with standard-dose scans reconstructed using ASIR (p > 0.05). Average effective doses were 3.7, 1.2, and 0.9 mSv for standard scans at NIs of 33, 60, and 70, respectively. MBIR shows superior noise reduction and improved image quality. Substantial dose reduction can be achieved by increasing the NI parameters as tested in this study without affecting image quality and diagnostic confidence.
AbstractList	The purpose of this article is to compare image quality between filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) at standard dose and two preselected low-dose scans.OBJECTIVEThe purpose of this article is to compare image quality between filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) at standard dose and two preselected low-dose scans.Thirty patients (16 men and 14 women; mean age, 67 years) were prospectively recruited. Patients underwent three scans (one standard-dose scan and two low-dose scans at noise indexes [NIs] of 33, 60, and 70, respectively). All three scans were reconstructed with FBP, ASIR, and MBIR. Objective and subjective image qualities were compared. Dose-length products and effective doses for each scans were recorded. Mean image noise and attenuation values were compared between different reconstruction algorithms using repeated-measures analysis of variance and paired Student t tests. The interobserver variation between the two radiologists for subjective image quality and lesion assessment was estimated by using weighted kappa statistics.SUBJECTS AND METHODSThirty patients (16 men and 14 women; mean age, 67 years) were prospectively recruited. Patients underwent three scans (one standard-dose scan and two low-dose scans at noise indexes [NIs] of 33, 60, and 70, respectively). All three scans were reconstructed with FBP, ASIR, and MBIR. Objective and subjective image qualities were compared. Dose-length products and effective doses for each scans were recorded. Mean image noise and attenuation values were compared between different reconstruction algorithms using repeated-measures analysis of variance and paired Student t tests. The interobserver variation between the two radiologists for subjective image quality and lesion assessment was estimated by using weighted kappa statistics.Objective image analysis supports significant noise reduction with low-dose scans using the MBIR technique (p < 0.05). There was no significant change in mean CT numbers between different reconstructions (p > 0.05). Subjective analysis reveals no significant difference between image quality and diagnostic confidence between low-dose MBIR scans compared with standard-dose scans reconstructed using ASIR (p > 0.05). Average effective doses were 3.7, 1.2, and 0.9 mSv for standard scans at NIs of 33, 60, and 70, respectively.RESULTSObjective image analysis supports significant noise reduction with low-dose scans using the MBIR technique (p < 0.05). There was no significant change in mean CT numbers between different reconstructions (p > 0.05). Subjective analysis reveals no significant difference between image quality and diagnostic confidence between low-dose MBIR scans compared with standard-dose scans reconstructed using ASIR (p > 0.05). Average effective doses were 3.7, 1.2, and 0.9 mSv for standard scans at NIs of 33, 60, and 70, respectively.MBIR shows superior noise reduction and improved image quality. Substantial dose reduction can be achieved by increasing the NI parameters as tested in this study without affecting image quality and diagnostic confidence.CONCLUSIONMBIR shows superior noise reduction and improved image quality. Substantial dose reduction can be achieved by increasing the NI parameters as tested in this study without affecting image quality and diagnostic confidence. The purpose of this article is to compare image quality between filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) at standard dose and two preselected low-dose scans. Thirty patients (16 men and 14 women; mean age, 67 years) were prospectively recruited. Patients underwent three scans (one standard-dose scan and two low-dose scans at noise indexes [NIs] of 33, 60, and 70, respectively). All three scans were reconstructed with FBP, ASIR, and MBIR. Objective and subjective image qualities were compared. Dose-length products and effective doses for each scans were recorded. Mean image noise and attenuation values were compared between different reconstruction algorithms using repeated-measures analysis of variance and paired Student t tests. The interobserver variation between the two radiologists for subjective image quality and lesion assessment was estimated by using weighted kappa statistics. Objective image analysis supports significant noise reduction with low-dose scans using the MBIR technique (p < 0.05). There was no significant change in mean CT numbers between different reconstructions (p > 0.05). Subjective analysis reveals no significant difference between image quality and diagnostic confidence between low-dose MBIR scans compared with standard-dose scans reconstructed using ASIR (p > 0.05). Average effective doses were 3.7, 1.2, and 0.9 mSv for standard scans at NIs of 33, 60, and 70, respectively. MBIR shows superior noise reduction and improved image quality. Substantial dose reduction can be achieved by increasing the NI parameters as tested in this study without affecting image quality and diagnostic confidence.
Author	Mitchell, Grant R Riordan, Richard D Vardhanabhuti, Varut Roobottom, Carl A Loader, Robert J
Author_xml	– sequence: 1 givenname: Varut surname: Vardhanabhuti fullname: Vardhanabhuti, Varut email: v.vardhanabhuti@nhs.net organization: Department of Radiology, Derriford Hospital, Derriford Rd, Plymouth, Devon PL6 8DH, UK. v.vardhanabhuti@nhs.net – sequence: 2 givenname: Robert J surname: Loader fullname: Loader, Robert J – sequence: 3 givenname: Grant R surname: Mitchell fullname: Mitchell, Grant R – sequence: 4 givenname: Richard D surname: Riordan fullname: Riordan, Richard D – sequence: 5 givenname: Carl A surname: Roobottom fullname: Roobottom, Carl A
BackLink	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23436843$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark	eNp1kEFP3DAQha0K1F2gp94rH3sgS2wncfa4WlFKhYSE4Lya2JPF1LF3Mw4V_48fhktB6oXTezP69EbzjthBiAEZ-yrKhZSiOlv9ulkIuVhWsvrE5qKumkKJShz852fsiOihLEvdLvVnNpOqUk1bqTl7vhxgi3w_gXfpiQMREg0YEo89pwTBwmgLnpX7-KewkZCbe6TE17d8Ihe2vHc-4YiWd2B-890YH9AkF8MpBwu75B7xb1BylJwBz12G4XU7oomB0ji94_lIiI_o-RAt-qIDyqkf8Rz8No4u3Q90wg578IRf3vSY3f04v13_LK6uLy7Xq6vCqLpOhRS11qhrbBvdiN4C5FGW1i7bbFSleys6K6VUumuV0Uo3XWsktALBCBTymH3_l5uf3E-5hM3gyKD3EDBOtBFKyKZuc7kZ_faGTt2AdrMb3QDj0-a9efkCov6MGg
CitedBy_id	crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_014_3507_0 crossref_primary_10_1097_RCT_0000000000000062 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejrad_2014_06_024 crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20160625 crossref_primary_10_1097_RCT_0000000000000460 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00247_016_3698_4 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_acra_2016_07_018 crossref_primary_10_1148_radiol_13130740 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_radi_2021_07_010 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejrad_2015_03_012 crossref_primary_10_3348_jksr_2018_78_4_235 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10140_017_1487_5 crossref_primary_10_1007_s13244_013_0273_5 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_clinimag_2013_11_009 crossref_primary_10_3390_cancers16010186 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_016_4716_5 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_compfluid_2024_106450 crossref_primary_10_1097_RCT_0000000000000505 crossref_primary_10_1140_epjp_s13360_023_03745_4 crossref_primary_10_1093_rpd_ncab039 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_crad_2016_11_021 crossref_primary_10_1148_radiol_2015132766 crossref_primary_10_1120_jacmp_v17i6_6184 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_015_4126_0 crossref_primary_10_1111_1754_9485_12733 crossref_primary_10_4103_ijri_IJRI_124_18 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jped_2018_07_010 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0204797 crossref_primary_10_3348_kjr_2018_0893 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40134_015_0088_x crossref_primary_10_1016_j_diii_2016_01_007 crossref_primary_10_1067_j_cpradiol_2015_11_004 crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6498_abf901 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_acra_2014_01_023 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejrad_2015_07_011 crossref_primary_10_1097_RCT_0b013e3182ab6cc0 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_rcl_2016_05_004 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_021_07712_4 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_crad_2015_06_095 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_017_4783_2 crossref_primary_10_4329_wjr_v8_i6_618 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmir_2017_04_001 crossref_primary_10_1097_RCT_0000000000000087 crossref_primary_10_1002_mp_12729 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_014_3563_5 crossref_primary_10_1097_RTI_0000000000000122 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_acra_2014_12_017 crossref_primary_10_1109_TMI_2018_2847250 crossref_primary_10_1097_RCT_0000000000000128 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10554_014_0379_y crossref_primary_10_1136_bmjopen_2018_025661 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_diii_2014_08_006 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0105735 crossref_primary_10_1097_RCT_0000000000000408 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10278_024_01080_3 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_acra_2014_10_008 crossref_primary_10_1517_17530059_2013_826647 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_radi_2018_04_010 crossref_primary_10_1177_0284185115578469 crossref_primary_10_1097_RLI_0000000000000017 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_014_3306_7 crossref_primary_10_1097_MCP_0000000000000066 crossref_primary_10_1097_RCT_0000000000000231 crossref_primary_10_2217_cpr_14_60 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_015_4060_1 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_021_08410_x crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmir_2014_02_002 crossref_primary_10_1002_acm2_12710 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11604_014_0376_z crossref_primary_10_1177_2058460116662299 crossref_primary_10_3348_kjr_2018_19_3_516 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00261_017_1140_5 crossref_primary_10_1111_1754_9485_12546 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejrad_2017_04_006 crossref_primary_10_3233_XST_160608 crossref_primary_10_1007_s44443_025_00085_4 crossref_primary_10_1148_radiol_14140676 crossref_primary_10_1177_0284185114537256
ContentType	Journal Article
DBID	CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8
DOI	10.2214/AJR.12.9424
DatabaseName	Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle	MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList	MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE
Database_xml	– sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod	no_fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline	Medicine
EISSN	1546-3141
ExternalDocumentID	23436843
Genre	Journal Article
GroupedDBID	--- -DD .55 .GJ 1CY 1KJ 23M 2WC 34G 39C 3O- 53G 5GY 5RE AAEJM AAWTL ABOCM ACRZS ADBBV AENEX AFFNX AI. AJJEV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS BAWUL C1A CGR CS3 CUY CVF DIK E3Z EBS ECM EIF EJD F5P GX1 H13 J5H L7B LSO MJL NPM P2P SJN TR2 TRR TWZ UDS VH1 W2D W8F WH7 WOQ X7M YJK YQI YQJ ZGI ZVN ZXP 7X8
ID	FETCH-LOGICAL-c355t-21577e75e86761fdaa77e20dd9877e347fd1bd22237b83c7376b8c2a81eac1e12
IEDL.DBID	7X8
ISICitedReferencesCount	95
ISICitedReferencesURI	http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000316054500026&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN	1546-3141
IngestDate	Thu Oct 02 11:20:06 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 03 06:58:35 EDT 2025
IsPeerReviewed	true
IsScholarly	true
Issue	3
Language	English
LinkModel	DirectLink
MergedId	FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c355t-21577e75e86761fdaa77e20dd9877e347fd1bd22237b83c7376b8c2a81eac1e12
Notes	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
PMID	23436843
PQID	1312658343
PQPubID	23479
ParticipantIDs	proquest_miscellaneous_1312658343 pubmed_primary_23436843
PublicationCentury	2000
PublicationDate	2013-Mar 20130301
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD	2013-03-01
PublicationDate_xml	– month: 03 year: 2013 text: 2013-Mar
PublicationDecade	2010
PublicationPlace	United States
PublicationPlace_xml	– name: United States
PublicationTitle	American journal of roentgenology (1976)
PublicationTitleAlternate	AJR Am J Roentgenol
PublicationYear	2013
SSID	ssj0007897
Score	2.4017258
Snippet	The purpose of this article is to compare image quality between filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and...
SourceID	proquest pubmed
SourceType	Aggregation Database Index Database
StartPage	545
SubjectTerms	Aged Aged, 80 and over Algorithms Data Interpretation, Statistical Female Humans Male Middle Aged Radiation Dosage Radiation Protection - methods Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods Radiography, Thoracic - methods Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Thoracic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods
Title	Image quality assessment of standard- and low-dose chest CT using filtered back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and novel model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms
URI	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23436843 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1312658343
Volume	200
WOSCitedRecordID	wos000316054500026&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText
inHoldings	1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link	http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1ZS8QwEA5eiC_e98EIPho0SW3SJxFRVHARUdi3JU1SFdd2dVfF_-cPcybt6pMg-NKLHmlnOvNlJpmPsR2njUtTrzhC7cATnxueF7rgIvcykzRZM7hINqFbLdNuZ1dNwK3fDKsc2sRoqH3lKEa-J5SQ6C1Vog57z5xYoyi72lBojLJxhVCGtFq3f6qFa1OTqxwkKdqaRNTz86QUyd7RxTWFAbOEprr_hi2jjzmd-W_rZtl0gy7hqFaHOTYSynk2ednkzxfY5_kT2g-oZ1J-gP0uywlVAcOoAgdcQ7d6577qB4iMWnB8AzRE_g6KB8qvBw-5dY_QBHJQuLtgve2R8aQbDWL9Z2xKXbWZjsau93e52t34kLJ6C12IbDyc_Kn_9Xyw3Tt84cH9U3-R3Z6e3Byf8YbHgTtEMwOOqELroA-CSXUqCm8t7sp97zODGyrRhSfVQKCic6OcRpuXGyetEegVRBByiY2VVRlWGGQ-xx6YyRBWUMdJGcQfft8HVLccoWC2yraH8ungf0LJD1uG6rXf-ZHQKluuhdzp1QU9OlJRHf5Erf3h6nU2JSMjBg1D22DjBVqJsMkm3Bt-2ZetqIC4bF1dfgFOZOqI
linkProvider	ProQuest
openUrl	ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Image+quality+assessment+of+standard-+and+low-dose+chest+CT+using+filtered+back+projection%2C+adaptive+statistical+iterative+reconstruction%2C+and+novel+model-based+iterative+reconstruction+algorithms&rft.jtitle=American+journal+of+roentgenology+%281976%29&rft.au=Vardhanabhuti%2C+Varut&rft.au=Loader%2C+Robert+J&rft.au=Mitchell%2C+Grant+R&rft.au=Riordan%2C+Richard+D&rft.date=2013-03-01&rft.eissn=1546-3141&rft.volume=200&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=545&rft_id=info:doi/10.2214%2FAJR.12.9424&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F23436843&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F23436843&rft.externalDocID=23436843
thumbnail_l	http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1546-3141&client=summon
thumbnail_m	http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1546-3141&client=summon
thumbnail_s	http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1546-3141&client=summon