Evaluation of image quality and radiation dose saving comparing knowledge model–based iterative reconstruction on 80-kV CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) with hybrid iterative reconstruction on 100-kV CT
- 122 Downloads
To evaluate dose reduction and image quality of 80-kV CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) reconstructed with knowledge model–based iterative reconstruction (IMR), and compared with 100-kV CTPA with hybrid iterative reconstruction (iDose4).
Materials and methods
One hundred and fifty-one patients were prospectively investigated for pulmonary embolism; a study group of 76 patients underwent low-kV setting (80 kV, automated mAs) CTPA study, while a control group of 75 patients underwent standard CTPA protocol (100 kV; automated mAs); all patients were examined on 256 MDCT scanner (Philips iCTelite). Study group images were reconstructed using IMR while the control group ones with iDose4. CTDIvol, DLP, and ED were evaluated. Region of interests placed in the main pulmonary vessels evaluated vascular enhancement (HU); signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated.
Compared to iDose4-CTPA, low-kV IMR-CTPA presented lower CTDIvol (6.41 ± 0.84 vs 9.68 ± 3.5 mGy) and DLP (248.24 ± 3.2 vs 352.4 ± 3.59 mGy × cm), with ED of 3.48 ± 1.2 vs 4.93 ± 1.8 mSv. Moreover, IMR-CTPA showed higher values of attenuation (670.91 ± 9.09 HU vs 292.61 ± 15.5 HU) and a significantly higher SNR (p < 0.0001) and CNR (p < 0.0001).The subjective image quality of low-kV IMR-CTPA was also higher compared with iDose4-CTPA (p < 0.0001).
Low-dose CTPA (80 kV and automated mAs modulation) reconstructed with IMR represents a feasible protocol for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in the emergency setting, achieving high image quality with low noise, and a significant dose reduction within adequate reconstruction times(≤ 120 s).
KeywordsRadiation Tomography Pulmonary embolism
Computed tomography pulmonary angiography
Knowledge model–based iterative reconstruction
Hybrid iterative reconstruction
Multidetector computed tomography
Computed tomography dose index
Region of interest
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Every patient gave his informed consent, as required by our Institution.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
- 22.Deak Z, Grimm JM, Treitl M et al (2013) Filtered back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and a model-based iterative reconstruction in abdominal CT: an experimental clinical study. Radiology 266:197–206 1670 Eur Radiol (2015) 25:1665–1671Google Scholar
- 23.Katsura M, Matsuda I, Akahane M et al (2013) Model-based iterative reconstruction technique for ultralow-dose chest CT: comparison of pulmonary nodule detectability with the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol 48:206–212Google Scholar
- 26.Boyden EA (1995) Segmental anatomy of the lungs. McGraw-Hill, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
- 29.Mc Collough (2008) “The measurement,reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT”, Report 96, American Association of Phyicist in Medicine, Report of AAPM Task Group 23, pp. 1–28Google Scholar
- 32.Yuki H, Utsunomiya D, Funama Y et al (2014) Value of knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction in low-kV 256-slice coronary CT angiography. J Cardiovasc ComputTomogr 8:115Google Scholar
- 35.Suntharalingam S, Mikat C, Stenzel E, Erfanian Y et al (2017) Submillisievert standard-pitch CT pulmonary angiography with ultra-low dose contrast media administration: A comparison to standard CT imaging. PLoS One 12(10):e0186694. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186694 eCollection 2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar