1naresh
Array
(
[urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
(
[runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
[type] => guest
[service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
[access-type] => Controlled
[privilege] => Array
(
[urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
(
[runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
[type] => privilege-set
[privilege-set] => GUEST
)
)
[credentials] => Array
(
[method] => guest
)
)
)
1nareshArray
(
[urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
(
[runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
[type] => guest
[service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
[access-type] => FreeToRead
[privilege] => Array
(
[urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
(
[runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
[type] => privilege-set
[privilege-set] => GUEST
)
)
[credentials] => Array
(
[method] => guest
)
)
)
PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU - Gaddikeri, S.
AU - Andre, J.B.
AU - Benjert, J.
AU - Hippe, D.S.
AU - Anzai, Y.
TI - Impact of Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction on Image Quality of Contrast-Enhanced Neck CT
AID - 10.3174/ajnr.A4123
DP - 2015 Feb 01
TA - American Journal of Neuroradiology
PG - 391--396
VI - 36
IP - 2
4099 - http://www.ajnr.org/content/36/2/391.short
4100 - http://www.ajnr.org/content/36/2/391.full
SO - Am. J. Neuroradiol.2015 Feb 01; 36
AB - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Improved image quality is clinically desired for contrast-enhanced CT of the neck. We compared 30% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms for the assessment of image quality of contrast-enhanced CT of the neck. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Neck contrast-enhanced CT data from 64 consecutive patients were reconstructed retrospectively by using 30% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and model-based iterative reconstruction. Objective image quality was assessed by comparing SNR, contrast-to-noise ratio, and background noise at levels 1 (mandible) and 2 (superior mediastinum). Two independent blinded readers subjectively graded the image quality on a scale of 1–5, (grade 5 = excellent image quality without artifacts and grade 1 = nondiagnostic image quality with significant artifacts). The percentage of agreement and disagreement between the 2 readers was assessed. RESULTS: Compared with 30% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, model-based iterative reconstruction significantly improved the SNR and contrast-to-noise ratio at levels 1 and 2. Model-based iterative reconstruction also decreased background noise at level 1 (P = .016), though there was no difference at level 2 (P = .61). Model-based iterative reconstruction was scored higher than 30% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction by both reviewers at the nasopharynx (P < .001) and oropharynx (P < .001) and for overall image quality (P < .001) and was scored lower at the vocal cords (P < .001) and sternoclavicular junction (P < .001), due to artifacts related to thyroid shielding that were specific for model-based iterative reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Model-based iterative reconstruction offers improved subjective and objective image quality as evidenced by a higher SNR and contrast-to-noise ratio and lower background noise within the same dataset for contrast-enhanced neck CT. Model-based iterative reconstruction has the potential to reduce the radiation dose while maintaining the image quality, with a minor downside being prominent artifacts related to thyroid shield use on model-based iterative reconstruction. ASiR3030% adaptive statistical iterative reconstructionBNbackground noiseCNRcontrast-to-noise ratioFBPfiltered back-projectionHUHounsfield unitsMBIRmodel-based iterative reconstructionPMpectoris muscleSCMsternocleidomastoid muscleSVCsuperior vena cava