European journal of radiology · 2016
Knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction technique in computed tomography of lumbar spine lowers radiation dose and improves tissue differentiation for patients with lower back pain.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang Cheng Hui, Wu Tung-Hsin, Lin Chung-Jung, Chiou Yi-You, Chen Ying-Chou, Sheu Ming-Huei, Guo Wan-Yuo, Chiu Chen Fen
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the image quality and diagnostic confidence of reduced-dose computed tomography (CT) of the lumbar spine (L-spine) reconstructed with knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction (IMR).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospectively, group A consisted of 55 patients imaged with standard acquisition reconstructed with filtered back-projection. Group B consisted of 58 patients imaged with half tube current, reconstructed with hybrid iterative reconstruction (iDose(4)) in Group B1 and knowledge-based IMR in Group B2. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of different regions, the contrast-to-noise ratio between the intervetebral disc (IVD) and dural sac (D-D CNR), and subjective image quality of different regions were compared. Higher strength IMR was also compared in spinal stenosis cases.
RESULTS: The SNR of the psoas muscle and D-D CNR were significantly higher in the IMR group. Except for the facet joint, subjective image quality of other regions including IVD, intervertebral foramen (IVF), dural sac, peridural fat, ligmentum flavum, and overall diagnostic acceptability were best for the IMR group. Diagnostic confidence of narrowing IVF and IVD was good (kappa=0.58-0.85). Higher strength IMR delineated IVD better in spinal stenosis cases.
CONCLUSION: Lower dose CT of L-spine reconstructed with IMR demonstrates better tissue differentiation than iDose(4) and standard dose CT with FBP.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospectively, group A consisted of 55 patients imaged with standard acquisition reconstructed with filtered back-projection. Group B consisted of 58 patients imaged with half tube current, reconstructed with hybrid iterative reconstruction (iDose(4)) in Group B1 and knowledge-based IMR in Group B2. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of different regions, the contrast-to-noise ratio between the intervetebral disc (IVD) and dural sac (D-D CNR), and subjective image quality of different regions were compared. Higher strength IMR was also compared in spinal stenosis cases.
RESULTS: The SNR of the psoas muscle and D-D CNR were significantly higher in the IMR group. Except for the facet joint, subjective image quality of other regions including IVD, intervertebral foramen (IVF), dural sac, peridural fat, ligmentum flavum, and overall diagnostic acceptability were best for the IMR group. Diagnostic confidence of narrowing IVF and IVD was good (kappa=0.58-0.85). Higher strength IMR delineated IVD better in spinal stenosis cases.
CONCLUSION: Lower dose CT of L-spine reconstructed with IMR demonstrates better tissue differentiation than iDose(4) and standard dose CT with FBP.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLow Back PainLumbar VertebraeMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationPatient SelectionProspective StudiesRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsSignal-To-Noise RatioSpinal DiseasesTomography, X-Ray Computed