Improving head and neck CTA with hybrid and model-based iterative reconstruction techniques. Issue 11 (November 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Niesten, J.M.; van der Schaaf, I.C.; Vos, P.C.; Willemink, M.J.; Velthuis, B.K.
• Is Part Of: Clinical radiology. Volume 70:Issue 11(2015)
• Page Start: 1252
• Page End: 1259
• Publication Date: 2015-11
• Subjects: Medical radiology -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Radiology -- Periodicals; Societies, Medical -- Periodicals; Medical radiology; Radiotherapy; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.0757
• DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2015.06.095
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0009-9260

Abstract

<abstract xml:lang="en" abstract-type="author" id="abs0010"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec> <title id="sectitle0010">Aim</title> <p id="abspara0010">To compare image quality of head and neck computed tomography angiography (CTA) reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP), hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MIR) algorithms.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0015">Materials and methods</title> <p id="abspara0015">The raw data of 34 studies were simultaneously reconstructed with FBP, HIR (iDose<sup>4</sup>, Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherlands), and with a prototype version of a MIR algorithm (IMR, Philips Healthcare). Objective (contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR], vascular contrast, automatic vessel analysis [AVA], stenosis grade) and subjective image quality (ranking at level of the circle of Willis, carotid bifurcation, and shoulder) of the five reconstructions were compared using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc analysis.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0020">Results</title> <p id="abspara0020">Vascular contrast was significantly higher in both the circle of Willis and carotid bifurcation with both levels of MIR compared to the other reconstruction methods (all <italic>p</italic><0.0001). The CNR was highest for high MIR, followed by low MIR, high HIR, mid HIR and FBP (<italic>p</italic><0.001 except low MIR versus high HIR; <italic>p</italic>>0.33). AVA showed most complete carotids in both MIR-levels, followed by high HIR (<italic>p</italic>>0.08), mid HIR (<italic>p</italic><0.023) and FBP (<italic>p</italic><0.010), vertebral arteries completeness was similar (<italic>p</italic>=0.40 and <italic>p</italic>=0.06). Stenosis grade showed no significant differences (<italic>p</italic>=0.16). High HIR showed the best subjective image quality at the circle of Willis and carotid bifurcation level, followed by mid HIR. At shoulder level, low MIR and high HIR were ranked best, followed by high MIR.</p> </sec> <sec> <title id="sectitle0025">Conclusion</title> <p id="abspara0025">Objectively, MIR significantly improved the overall image quality, reduced image noise, and improved automated vessel analysis, whereas FBP showed the lowest objective image quality. Subjectively, the highest level of HIR was considered superior at the level of the circle of Willis and the carotid bifurcation, and along with the lowest level of MIR for the origins of the neck arteries at shoulder level.</p> </sec> </abstract>