Impact of iterative reconstruction vs. filtered back projection on image quality in 320-slice CT coronary angiography: Insights from the CORE320 multicenter study. Issue 48 (December 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fareed, Ahmed; Vavere, Andrea L.; Zimmermann, Elke; Tanami, Yutaka; Steveson, Chloe; Matheson, Matthew; Paul, Narinder; Clouse, Melvin; Cox, Christopher; Lima, João A.C.; Arbab-Zadeh, Armin
• Other Names: Zhang. Yao-Jun section editor.
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 96:Issue 48(2017)
• Publication Date: 2017-12
• Subjects: adaptive iterative dose reduction -- CT coronary angiography -- image quality; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008452
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract : Abstract: Iterative reconstruction has been shown to reduce image noise compared with traditional filtered back projection with quantum denoising software (FBP/QDS+) in CT imaging but few comparisons have been made in the same patients without the influence of interindividual factors. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of adaptive iterative dose reduction in 3-dimensional (AIDR 3D) and FBP/QDS+-based image reconstruction on image quality in the same patients. We randomly selected 100 patients enrolled in the coronary evaluation using 320-slice CT study who underwent CT coronary angiography using prospectively electrocardiogram triggered image acquisition with a 320-detector scanner. Both FBP/QDS+ and AIDR 3D reconstructions were performed using original data. Studies were blindly analyzed for image quality by measuring the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Image quality was assessed qualitatively using a 4-point scale. Median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 56–71) and 72% were men, median body mass index 27 (IQR: 24–30) and median calcium score 222 (IQR: 11–644). For all regions of interest, mean image noise was lower for AIDR 3D vs. FBP/QDS+ (31.69 vs. 34.37, P ⩽ .001). SNR and CNR were significantly higher for AIDR 3D vs. FBP/QDS+ (16.28 vs. 14.64, P < .001 and 19.21 vs. 17.06, P < .001, respectively). Subjective (qualitative) image quality scores were better using AIDR 3D vs. FBP/QDS+ with means of 1.6 and 1.74, respectively ( P ⩽ .001). Assessed in the same individuals, iterative reconstruction decreased image noise and raised SNR/CNR as well as subjective image quality scores compared with traditional FBP/QDS+ in 320-slice CT coronary angiography at standard radiation doses.