TY - JOUR
T1 - Emphysema quantification using ultralow-dose CT with iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection
AU - Nishio, Mizuho
AU - Koyama, Hisanobu
AU - Ohno, Yoshiharu
AU - Negi, Noriyuki
AU - Seki, Shinichiro
AU - Yoshikawa, Takeshi
AU - Sugimura, Kazuro
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 American Roentgen Ray Society.
PY - 2016/6
Y1 - 2016/6
N2 - OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate agreement between standarddose CT (SDCT) and ultralow-dose CT (ULDCT) findings with respect to emphysema quantification. ULDCT images were reconstructed with and without iterative reconstruction (IR). Adaptive iterative dose reduction with 3D processing was used for IR. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Fifty patients who underwent SDCT and ULDCT were included. The tube current for SDCT was 250 mA, and that for ULDCT was 10 mA. SDCT, ULDCT without IR, and ULDCT with IR were used for emphysema quantification. The low-attenuation volume percentage (LAV%) in the lungs at four thresholds (-970, -950, -930, and -910 HU), mean lung attenuation, and total lung volume were computed. Concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) were used to assess the agreement of emphysema quantification between SDCT and ULDCT. RESULTS. The LAV% CCC values were 0.310-0.789 between SDCT and ULDCT without IR and 0.934-0.966 between SDCT and ULDCT with IR. The agreement of LAV% improved when IR was used for ULDCT. The mean lung attenuation CCC value between SDCT and ULDCT without IR was substantial (0.957), whereas that between SDCT and ULDCT with IR was poor (0.890). The total lung volume CCC values were substantial (0.982 with IR, 0.983 without IR). CONCLUSION. ULDCT with and without IR can substitute for SDCT in emphysema quantification.
AB - OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate agreement between standarddose CT (SDCT) and ultralow-dose CT (ULDCT) findings with respect to emphysema quantification. ULDCT images were reconstructed with and without iterative reconstruction (IR). Adaptive iterative dose reduction with 3D processing was used for IR. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Fifty patients who underwent SDCT and ULDCT were included. The tube current for SDCT was 250 mA, and that for ULDCT was 10 mA. SDCT, ULDCT without IR, and ULDCT with IR were used for emphysema quantification. The low-attenuation volume percentage (LAV%) in the lungs at four thresholds (-970, -950, -930, and -910 HU), mean lung attenuation, and total lung volume were computed. Concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) were used to assess the agreement of emphysema quantification between SDCT and ULDCT. RESULTS. The LAV% CCC values were 0.310-0.789 between SDCT and ULDCT without IR and 0.934-0.966 between SDCT and ULDCT with IR. The agreement of LAV% improved when IR was used for ULDCT. The mean lung attenuation CCC value between SDCT and ULDCT without IR was substantial (0.957), whereas that between SDCT and ULDCT with IR was poor (0.890). The total lung volume CCC values were substantial (0.982 with IR, 0.983 without IR). CONCLUSION. ULDCT with and without IR can substitute for SDCT in emphysema quantification.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84999273757&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84999273757&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2214/AJR.15.15684
DO - 10.2214/AJR.15.15684
M3 - Article
C2 - 27058307
AN - SCOPUS:84999273757
SN - 0361-803X
VL - 206
SP - 1184
EP - 1192
JO - American Journal of Roentgenology
JF - American Journal of Roentgenology
IS - 6
ER -