Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reducing the radiation dose for computed tomography colonography using model-based iterative reconstruction

  • Published:
Abdominal Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine whether radiation doses during computed tomography (CT) colonography (CTC) can be further reduced while maintaining image quality using model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR).

Methods

Twenty patients underwent CTC at a standard dose in supine and prone positions and at a reduced dose in the supine position. All other scan parameters (except noise index) were held constant. Acquisitions were reconstructed using 3 algorithms: filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and MBIR. Noise was assessed quantitatively by comparing the SD in Hounsfield units at 5 standard locations. Qualitative assessment was made by 2 experienced radiologists blinded to technique who subjectively scored image quality, noise, and sharpness (from 0 to 4).

Results

The standard-dose and reduced-dose CT dose index/dose-length product were 6.7/328 and 2.7 mGy/129 mGy-cm, respectively (60 % reduction). Measured mean noise level increased from the standard to the reduced dose (FBP, from 58.6 to 97.2; ASIR from 35.8 to 60.6; and MBIR from 16.6 to 21.9). MBIR had significantly less noise than ASIR on 2-dimensional images at both standard and reduced doses (P < .01).

Conclusions

Radiation dose in CTC using MBIR can be reduced by 60 % while maintaining image quality and reducing image noise.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ASIR:

Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction

BMI:

Body mass index (weight in kg divided by height in m2 [kg/m2])

CT:

Computed tomography

CTC:

Computed tomography colonography

DLP:

Dose-length product

FBP:

Filtered back projection

HIPAA:

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

kVp:

Kilovolts peak

mAs:

Milliamperes-second

MBIR:

Model-based iterative reconstruction

MDCT:

Multidetector computed tomography

mSv:

Millisievert

References

  1. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Halligan S, Marmo R (2011) Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 259(2):393–405

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Regge D, Laudi C, Galatola G, et al. (2009) Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomographic colonography for the detection of advanced neoplasia in individuals at increased risk of colorectal cancer. JAMA 301(23):2453–2461

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. (2008) Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin 58(3):130–160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Friedel DM, Iqbal S, Stavropoulos SN, et al. (2012) Evolving role of computed tomographic colonography in colon cancer screening and diagnosis. South Med J. 105(10):551–557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Perisinakis K, Seimenis I, Tzedakis A, et al. (2012) Screening computed tomography colonography with 256-slice scanning: should patient radiation burden and associated cancer risk constitute a major concern? Invest Radiol. 47(8):451–456

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA (2005) Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 129(1):328–337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim KP, Knudsen AB, et al. (2011) Radiation-related cancer risks from CT colonography screening: a risk-benefit analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196(4):816–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Verdun FR, Bochud F, Gundinchet F, et al. (2008) Quality initiatives radiation risk: what you should know to tell your patient. Radiographics 28(7):1807–1816

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE, et al. (1997) Reducing data size and radiation dose for CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168(5):1181–1184

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IW, et al. (2002) CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology 224(1):25–33

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Flicek KT, Hara AK, Silva AC, et al. (2010) Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195(1):126–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J (2007) A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys 34(11):4526–4544

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, et al. (2008) Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med. 359(12):1207–1217 (Erratum in: N Engl J Med. 2008;359(26):2853)

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Christner JA, Kofler JM, McCollough CH (2010) Estimating effective dose for CT using dose-length product compared with using organ doses: consequences of adopting International Commission on Radiological Protection publication 103 or dual-energy scanning. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 194(4):881–889 (Erratum in: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(5):1404)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pickhardt PJ, Lubner MG, Kim DH, et al. (2012) Abdominal CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): initial results of a prospective trial comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 199(6):1266–1274

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yoon MA, Kim SH, Lee JM, et al. (2012) Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and Veo: assessment of image quality and diagnostic performance in CT colonography at various radiation doses. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 36(5):596–601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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(4):206–212

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chang KJ, Caovan DB, Grand DJ, Huda W, Mayo-Smith WW (2013) Reducing radiation dose at CT colonography: decreasing tube voltage to 100 kVp. Radiology. 266(3):791–800 (Epub 2012 Dec 21)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Ethical Statement

This study conformed to current US laws. Before the study was conducted, institutional review board approval was obtained and documented, and informed consent was obtained from patients per the guidelines of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 13400 E Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ, 85259, USA

    Patrick J. Millerd, Robert G. Paden, Jeffrey T. Lund, Amy K. Hara, Wendy L. Stiles & C. Daniel Johnson

  2. Division of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA

    Qing Wu

  3. Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

    Miao He

Authors
  1. Patrick J. Millerd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert G. Paden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeffrey T. Lund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amy K. Hara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wendy L. Stiles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Miao He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Qing Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. C. Daniel Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Daniel Johnson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Millerd, P.J., Paden, R.G., Lund, J.T. et al. Reducing the radiation dose for computed tomography colonography using model-based iterative reconstruction. Abdom Imaging 40, 1183–1189 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0271-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0271-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation