Does Iterative Reconstruction Improve Image Quality and Reduce Dose in Computed Tomography?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/ROJ-1-108Keywords:
Iterative Reconstruction (IR), Computed Tomography (CT), Filtered Back Projection, (FBP); Radiation dose, Image quality.Abstract
The Filtered Back Projection (FBP) algorithm has been the standard algorithm for image reconstruction
in computed tomography (CT) for many years, but it creates possible streak artifacts
and a notable increase in image noise when radiation dose is reduced exceedingly. With
technological advancement and increased computational capacities in workstations, iterative
reconstruction (IR) algorithms have re-emerged as a potential alternative. The purpose of this
review is to establish if there is a general consensus that IR algorithms faithfully reduce radiation
dose and improve image quality in CT in comparison with the FBP algorithm. A systematic
review of the literature from 2012 to 2015 was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed
databases, as well as various well-known journals such as the American Journal of Roentgenology,
European Journal of Radiology, Physica Medica and the Korean Journal of Radiology.
A total of 57 articles were categorized as either synopsis articles or performance evaluation
clinical studies, where the latter was further divided into 6 sub-categories according to the type
of IR algorithm examined. The results show that the use of IR algorithms reduces objective
image noise, and at least preserves spatial resolution and low contrast detectability, even when
dose is reduced. The findings are also applicable to specific patient groups, such as pediatrics
and obese patients. In conclusion, there is a general consensus that IR algorithms can faithfully
reduce radiation dose and improve image quality in CT in comparison with the FBP algorithm.
References
Beister M, Kolditz D, Kalender WA. Iterative reconstruc-tion methods in X-ray CT. Phys Med. 2012; 28(2): 94-108. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2012.01.003
Smith SW. The Scientist and Engineer’s Guide to Digital Sig-nal Processing. California, USA: California Technical Publish-ing; 1997: 447.
Berdahl CT, Vermeulen MJ, Larson DB, Schull MJ. Emergen-cy department computed tomography utilization in the United States and Canada. Ann Emerg Med. 2013; 62(5): 486-494.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.02.018
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Cancer risks from CT scans: Now we have data, what next? Radiology. 2012; 265(2): 330-331. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12121248
Ma S, Kong B, Liu B, Liu X. Biological effects of low-dose ra-diation from computed tomography scanning. Int J Radiat Biol. 2013; 89(5): 326-333. doi: 10.3109/09553002.2013.756595
Kaza RK, Platt JF, Goodsitt MM, et al. Emerging techniques for dose optimization in abdominal CT. Radiographics. 2014; 34(1): 4-17. doi: 10.1148/rg.341135038
Lee KH, Lee JM, Moon SK, et al. Attenuation-based auto-matic tube voltage selection and tube current modulation for dose reduction at contrast-enhanced liver CT. Radiology. 2012; 265(2): 437-447. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12112434
Hsieh J, Nett B, Yu Z, Sauer K, Thibault J-B, Bouman CA. Recent advances in CT image reconstruction. Current Radiology Reports. 2013;1(1): 39-51. doi: 10.1007/s40134-012-0003-7
Geyer LL, Schoepf UJ, Meinel FG, et al. State of the art: It-erative CT reconstruction techniques. Radiology. 2015; 276(2): 339-357. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2015132766
Goldman AR, Maldjian PD. Reducing radiation dose in body CT: A practical approach to optimizing CT protocols. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 200(4): 748-754. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.10330
Padole A, Ali Khawaja RD, Kalra MK, Singh S. CT radiation dose and iterative reconstruction techniques. AJR Am J Roent-genol. 2015; 204(4): W384-W392. doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13241
Seibert JA. Iterative reconstruction: How it works, how to apply it. Pediat Radiol. 2014; 44(Suppl 3): 431-439. doi: 10.1007/s00247-014-3102-1
Ehman EC, Yu L, Manduca A, et al. Methods for clini-cal evaluation of noise reduction techniques in abdominopel-vic CT. Radiographics. 2014; 34(4): 849-862. doi: 10.1148/ rg.344135128
Vachha B, Brodoefel H, Wilcox C, Hackney DB, Moonis G. Radiation dose reduction in soft tissue neck CT using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR). Eur J Radiol. 2013; 82(12): 2222-2226. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.08.014
Ren Q, Dewan SK, Li M, et al. Comparison of adaptive sta-tistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction tech-niques in brain CT. Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81(10): 2597-2601. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.12.041
Marin D, Choudhury KR, Gupta RT, et al. Clinical impact of an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm for de-tection of hypervascular liver tumours using a low tube voltage, high tube current MDCT technique. Eur Radiol. 2013; 23(12): 3325-3335. doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2964-1
Husarik DB, Alkadhi H, Puippe GD, et al. Model-based it-erative reconstruction for improvement of low-contrast detect-ability in liver CT at reduced radiation dose: Ex-vivo experi-ence. Clinical Radiology. 2015; 70(4): 366-372. doi: 10.1016/j. crad.2014.11.015
Yamada Y, Jinzaki M, Tanami Y, et al. Model-based iterative reconstruction technique for ultralow-dose computed tomogra-phy of the lung: A pilot study. Invest Radiol. 2012; 47(8): 482- 489. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3182562a89
Li K, Tang J, Chen GH. Statistical model based iterative re-construction (MBIR) in clinical CT systems: Experimental as-sessment of noise performance. Med Phys. 2014; 41(4): 041906. doi: 10.1118/1.4867863
Lim K, Kwon H, Cho J, et al. Initial phantom study com-paring image quality in computed tomography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and new adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction v. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2015; 39(3): 443-448. doi: 10.1097/rct.0000000000000216
Hwang HJ, Seo JB, Lee JS, et al. Radiation dose reduction of chest CT with iterative reconstruction in image space-Part I: Studies on image quality using dual source CT. Korean J Radiol. 2012; 13(6): 711-719. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2012.13.6.711
Park EA, Lee W, Kim KW, et al. Iterative reconstruction of dual-source coronary CT angiography: Assessment of im-age quality and radiation dose. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012; 28(7): 1775-1786. doi: 10.1007/s10554-011-0004-2
Korn A, Fenchel M, Bender B, et al. Iterative reconstruction in head CT: Image quality of routine and low-dose protocols in comparison with standard filtered back-projection. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012; 33(2): 218-224. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A2749
Lee M, Kim MJ, Han KH, Lee MJ. Half-dose abdominal CT with sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction technique in children-comparison with full-dose CT with filtered back projection. Pediat Radiol. 2015; 45(2): 188-193. doi: 10.1007/ s00247-014-3105-y
Haubenreisser H, Fink C, Nance JW Jr., et al. Feasibility of slice width reduction for spiral cranial computed tomography using iterative image reconstruction. Eur J Radiol. 2014; 83(6): 964-969. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.01.026
Romagnoli A, Funel V, Meschini A, et al. Optimisation of low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in total body examination. Radiol Med. 2012; 117(8): 1333-1346. doi: 10.1007/s11547-012-0897-3
Kaul D, Grupp U, Kahn J, et al. Reducing radiation dose in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and lower tube potential in computed to-mography. Eur Radiol. 2014; 24(11): 2685-2691. doi: 10.1007/ s00330-014-3290-y
Singh S, Kalra MK, Shenoy-Bhangle AS, et al. Radiation dose reduction with hybrid iterative reconstruction for pedi-atric CT. Radiology. 2012; 263(2): 537-546. doi: 1148/radi-ol.12110268
Desai GS, Uppot RN, Yu EW, Kambadakone AR, Sahani DV. Impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality and radiation dose in multidetector CT of large body size adults. Eur Radiol. 2012; 22(8): 1631-1640. doi: 10.1007/s00330-012-2424-3
Brady SL, Yee BS, Kaufman RA. Characterization of adap-tive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm for dose reduc-tion in CT: A pediatric oncology perspective. Med Phys. 2012; 39(9): 5520-5531. doi: 10.1118/1.4745563
Boning G, Schafer M, Grupp U, et al. Comparison of applied dose and image quality in staging CT of neuroendocrine tumor patients using standard filtered back projection and adaptive sta-tistical iterative reconstruction. Eur J Radiol. 2015; 84(8): 1601- 1607. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.04.017
Ning P, Zhu S, Shi D, Guo Y, Sun M. X-ray dose reduction in abdominal computed tomography using advanced iterative reconstruction algorithms. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(3): e92568. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092568
Katsura M, Sato J, Akahane M, et al. Comparison of pure and hybrid iterative reconstruction techniques with conventional filtered back projection: Image quality assessment in the cer-vicothoracic region. Eur J Radiol. 2013; 82(2): 356-360. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.11.004
Husarik DB, Marin D, Samei E, et al. Radiation dose reduc-tion in abdominal computed tomography during the late hepatic arterial phase using a model-based iterative reconstruction algo-rithm: How low can we go? Invest Radiol. 2012; 47(8): 468-474. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e318251eafd
Mieville FA, Berteloot L, Grandjean A, et al. Model-based iterative reconstruction in pediatric chest CT: Assessment of im-age quality in a prospective study of children with cystic fibro-sis. Pediatr Radiol. 2013; 43(5): 558-567. doi: 10.1007/s00247- 012-2554-4
Hoxworth JM, Lal D, Fletcher GP, et al. Radiation dose re-duction in paranasal sinus CT using model-based iterative re-construction. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014; 35(4): 644-649. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3749
Sun J, Zhang Q, Hu D, Duan X, Peng Y. Improving pul-monary vessel image quality with a full model-based iterative reconstruction algorithm in 80kVp low-dose chest CT for pedi-atric patients aged 0-6 years. Acta Radiol. 2015; 56(6): 761-768. doi: 10.1177/0284185114540884
Spears JR, Schoepf UJ, Henzler T, et al. Comparison of the effect of iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection on cardiac CT postprocessing. Acad Radiol. 2014; 21(3): 318- 324. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2013.11.008
Karpitschka M, Augart D, Becker HC, Reiser M, Graser A. Dose reduction in oncological staging multidetector CT: Ef-fect of iterative reconstruction. Br J Radiol. 2013; 86(1021): 20120224. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20120224
Bulla S, Blanke P, Hassepass F, et al. Reducing the radiation dose for low-dose CT of the paranasal sinuses using iterative re-construction: Feasibility and image quality. Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81(9): 2246-2250. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.05.002
Hur S, Lee JM, Kim SJ, Park JH, Han JK, Choi BI. 80-kVp CT using Iterative Reconstruction in Image Space algorithm for the detection of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma: Phantom and initial clinical experience. Korean J Radiol. 2012; 13(2): 152-164. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2012.13.2.152
Korn A, Bender B, Fenchel M, et al. Sinogram affirmed it-erative reconstruction in head CT: Improvement of objective and subjective image quality with concomitant radiation dose reduction. Eur J Radiol. 2013; 82(9): 1431-1435. doi: 10.1016/j. ejrad.2013.03.011
Wang H, Tan B, Zhao B, Liang C, Xu Z. Raw-data-based iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection: Im-age quality of low-dose chest computed tomography examina-tions in 87 patients. Clin Imaging. 2013; 37(6): 1024-1032. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2013.06.004
von Falck C, Bratanova V, Rodt T, et al. Influence of sino-gram affirmed iterative reconstruction of CT data on image noise characteristics and low-contrast detectability: An objective ap-proach. PLoS ONE . 2013; 8(2): e56875. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0056875
Schuhbaeck A, Achenbach S, Layritz C, et al. Image quality of ultra-low radiation exposure coronary CT angiography with an effective dose <0.1 mSv using high-pitch spiral acquisition and raw data-based iterative reconstruction. Eur Radiol. 2013; 23(3): 597-606. doi: 10.1007/s00330-012-2656-2
Wang R, Schoepf UJ, Wu R, et al. Image quality and ra-diation dose of low dose coronary CT angiography in obese pa-tients: Sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection. Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81(11): 3141-3145. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.04.012
Omoumi P, Verdun FR, Ben Salah Y, et al. Low-dose mul-tidetector computed tomography of the cervical spine: Optimi-zation of iterative reconstruction strength levels. Acta Radiol. 2014; 55(3): 335-344. doi: 10.1177/0284185113494981
Solomon J, Mileto A, Ramirez-Giraldo JC, Samei E. Di-agnostic performance of an advanced modeled iterative recon-struction algorithm for low-contrast detectability with a third-generation dual-source multidetector CT scanner: Potential for radiation dose reduction in a multireader study. Radiology. 2015; 275(3): 735-745. doi: 10.1148/radiol.15142005
Xie Q, Wu J, Tang Y, et al. Whole-organ CT perfusion of the pancreas: Impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality, perfusion parameters and radiation dose in 256-slice CT-prelim-inary findings. PLoS ONE . 2013; 8(11): e80468. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0080468
Love A, Siemund R, Hoglund P, et al. Hybrid iterative re-construction algorithm in brain CT: A radiation dose reduction and image quality assessment study. Acta Radiologica. 2014; 55(2): 208-217. doi: 10.1177/0284185113494980
Klink T, Obmann V, Heverhagen J, Stork A, Adam G, Be-gemann P. Reducing CT radiation dose with iterative recon-struction algorithms: The influence of scan and reconstruction parameters on image quality and CTDIvol. Eur J Radiol. 2014; 83(9):1645-1654. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.05.033
Arapakis I, Efstathopoulos E, Tsitsia V, et al. Using “iDose4” iterative reconstruction algorithm in adults’ chest-abdomen-pelvis CT examinations: Effect on image quality in relation to patient radiation exposure. Br J Radiol. 2014; 87(1036): 20130613. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20130613
Gervaise A, Osemont B, Lecocq S, et al. CT image qual-ity improvement using Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction with wide-volume acquisition on 320-detector CT. Eur Radiol. 2012; 22(2): 295-301. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2271-7
Kim M, Lee JM, Yoon JH, et al. Adaptive iterative dose reduction algorithm in CT: Effect on image quality compared with filtered back projection in body phantoms of different sizes. Korean J Radiol. 2014; 15(2): 195-204. doi: 10.3348/ kjr.2014.15.2.195
Schindera ST, Odedra D, Mercer D, et al. Hybrid iterative reconstruction technique for abdominal CT protocols in obese patients: Assessment of image quality, radiation dose, and low-contrast detectability in a phantom. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014; 202(2): W146-W152. doi: 10.2214/ajr.12.10513
Schindera ST, Odedra D, Raza SA, et al. Iterative recon-struction algorithm for CT: Can radiation dose be decreased while low-contrast detectability is preserved? Radiology. 2013; 269(2): 511-518. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13122349
Gervaise A, Osemont B, Louis M, Lecocq S, Teixeira P, Blum A. Standard dose versus low-dose abdominal and pelvic CT: Comparison between filtered back projection versus adap-tive iterative dose reduction 3D. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2014; 95(1): 47-53. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2013.05.005
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Radiology (ROJ) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.