CT dose and image quality in the last three scanner generations.

AIM To compare the computed tomography (CT) dose and image quality with the filtered back projection against the iterative reconstruction and CT with a minimal electronic noise detector. METHODS A lung phantom (Chest Phantom N1 by Kyoto Kagaku) was scanned with 3 different CT scanners: the Somatom Sensation, the Definition Flash and the Definition Edge (all from Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The scan parameters were identical to the Siemens presetting for THORAX ROUTINE (scan length 35 cm and FOV 33 cm). Nine different exposition levels were examined (reference mAs/peek voltage): 100/120, 100/100, 100/80, 50/120, 50/100, 50/80, 25/120, 25/100 and 25 mAs/80 kVp. Images from the SOMATOM Sensation were reconstructed using classic filtered back projection. Iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE, level 3) was performed for the two other scanners. A Stellar detector was used with the Somatom Definition Edge. The CT doses were represented by the dose length products (DLPs) (mGycm) provided by the scanners. Signal, contrast, noise and subjective image quality were recorded by two different radiologists with 10 and 3 years of experience in chest CT radiology. To determine the average dose reduction between two scanners, the integral of the dose difference was calculated from the lowest to the highest noise level. RESULTS When using iterative reconstruction (IR) instead of filtered back projection (FBP), the average dose reduction was 30%, 52% and 80% for bone, soft tissue and air, respectively, for the same image quality (P < 0.0001). The recently introduced Stellar detector (Sd) lowered the radiation dose by an additional 27%, 54% and 70% for bone, soft tissue and air, respectively (P < 0.0001). The benefit of dose reduction was larger at lower dose levels. With the same radiation dose, an average of 34% (22%-37%) and 25% (13%-46%) more contrast to noise was achieved by changing from FBP to IR and from IR to Sd, respectively. For the same contrast to noise level, an average of 59% (46%-71%) and 51% (38%-68%) dose reduction was produced for IR and Sd, respectively. For the same subjective image quality, the dose could be reduced by 25% (2%-42%) and 44% (33%-54%) using IR and Sd, respectively. CONCLUSION This study showed an average dose reduction between 27% and 70% for the new Stellar detector, which is equivalent to using IR instead of FBP.

Feasible Dose Reduction in Routine Chest Computed Tomography Maintaining Constant Image Quality Using the Last Three Scanner Generations: From Filtered Back Projection to Sinogram-affirmed Iterative Reconstruction and Impact of the Novel Fully Integrated Detector Design Minimizing Electronic Noise

OBJECTIVE The aim of the present study was to evaluate a dose reduction in contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography (CT) by comparing the three latest generations of Siemens CT scanners used in clinical practice. We analyzed the amount of radiation used with filtered back projection (FBP) and an iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithm to yield the same image quality. Furthermore, the influence on the radiation dose of the most recent integrated circuit detector (ICD; Stellar detector, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) was investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS 136 Patients were included. Scan parameters were set to a thorax routine: SOMATOM Sensation 64 (FBP), SOMATOM Definition Flash (IR), and SOMATOM Definition Edge (ICD and IR). Tube current was set constantly to the reference level of 100 mA automated tube current modulation using reference milliamperes. Care kV was used on the Flash and Edge scanner, while tube potential was individually selected between 100 and 140 kVp by the medical technologists at the SOMATOM Sensation. Quality assessment was performed on soft-tissue kernel reconstruction. Dose was represented by the dose length product. RESULTS Dose-length product (DLP) with FBP for the average chest CT was 308 mGy*cm ± 99.6. In contrast, the DLP for the chest CT with IR algorithm was 196.8 mGy*cm ± 68.8 (P = 0.0001). Further decline in dose can be noted with IR and the ICD: DLP: 166.4 mGy*cm ± 54.5 (P = 0.033). The dose reduction compared to FBP was 36.1% with IR and 45.6% with IR/ICD. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was favorable in the aorta, bone, and soft tissue for IR/ICD in combination compared to FBP (the P values ranged from 0.003 to 0.048). Overall contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) improved with declining DLP. CONCLUSION The most recent technical developments, namely IR in combination with integrated circuit detectors, can significantly lower radiation dose in chest CT examinations.

Dose Reduction in Standard Head CT: First Results from a New Scanner Using Iterative Reconstruction and a New Detector Type in Comparison with Two Previous Generations of Multi-slice CT

PURPOSE Computed tomography (CT) accounts for more than half of the total radiation exposure from medical procedures, which makes dose reduction in CT an effective means of reducing radiation exposure. We analysed the dose reduction that can be achieved with a new CT scanner [Somatom Edge (E)] that incorporates new developments in hardware (detector) and software (iterative reconstruction). METHODS We compared weighted volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP) values of 25 consecutive patients studied with non-enhanced standard brain CT with the new scanner and with two previous models each, a 64-slice 64-row multi-detector CT (MDCT) scanner with 64 rows (S64) and a 16-slice 16-row MDCT scanner with 16 rows (S16). We analysed signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios in images from the three scanners and performed a quality rating by three neuroradiologists to analyse whether dose reduction techniques still yield sufficient diagnostic quality. RESULTS CTDIVol of scanner E was 41.5 and 36.4 % less than the values of scanners S16 and S64, respectively; the DLP values were 40 and 38.3 % less. All differences were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios were best in S64; these differences also reached statistical significance. Image analysis, however, showed "non-inferiority" of scanner E regarding image quality. CONCLUSIONS The first experience with the new scanner shows that new dose reduction techniques allow for up to 40 % dose reduction while still maintaining image quality at a diagnostically usable level.