Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Radiology. 2018 Nov;289(2):443-454. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180137. Epub 2018 Jul 17.

CT Detectability of Small Low-Contrast Hypoattenuating Focal Lesions: Iterative Reconstructions versus Filtered Back Projection.

Author information

1
From the Departments of Radiology (A.M., D.A.Z., A.M.A., P.B., J.C., S.M.C., M.K.D., M.L.G., S.K., O.K., J.H.L., M.M., A.N., R.B.O., U.P.S., E.V.S., G.V.T., C.L.W., K.M.K.) and Bioengineering (C.P., J.L.), University of Washington School of Medicine, Box 357115, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA 98195; and Department of Radiology, University of Colorado-Denver, Aurora, Colo (J.H.M.).

Abstract

Purpose To investigate performance in detectability of small (≤1 cm) low-contrast hypoattenuating focal lesions by using filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms from two major CT vendors across a range of 11 radiation exposures. Materials and Methods A low-contrast detectability phantom consisting of 21 low-contrast hypoattenuating focal objects (seven sizes between 2.4 and 10.0 mm, three contrast levels) embedded into a liver-equivalent background was scanned at 11 radiation exposures (volume CT dose index range, 0.5-18.0 mGy; size-specific dose estimate [SSDE] range, 0.8-30.6 mGy) with four high-end CT platforms. Data sets were reconstructed by using FBP and varied strengths of image-based, model-based, and hybrid IRs. Sixteen observers evaluated all data sets for lesion detectability by using a two-alternative-forced-choice (2AFC) paradigm. Diagnostic performances were evaluated by calculating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and by performing noninferiority analyses. Results At benchmark exposure, FBP yielded a mean AUC of 0.79 ± 0.09 (standard deviation) across all platforms which, on average, was approximately 2% lower than that observed with the different IR algorithms, which showed an average AUC of 0.81 ± 0.09 (P = .12). Radiation decreases of 30%, 50%, and 80% resulted in similar declines of observer detectability with FBP (mean AUC decrease, -0.02 ± 0.05, -0.03 ± 0.05, and -0.05 ± 0.05, respectively) and all IR methods investigated (mean AUC decrease, -0.00 ± 0.05, -0.04 ± 0.05, and -0.04 ± 0.05, respectively). For each radiation level and CT platform, variance in performance across observers was greater than that across reconstruction algorithms (P = .03). Conclusion Iterative reconstruction algorithms have limited radiation optimization potential in detectability of small low-contrast hypoattenuating focal lesions. This task may be further complicated by a high degree of variation in radiologists' performances, seemingly exceeding real performance differences among reconstruction algorithms.

PMID:
30015591
DOI:
10.1148/radiol.2018180137
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon
Loading ...
Support Center