Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2018 Apr;25(4):509-518.
doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2017.10.020. Epub 2017 Nov 29.

Quantitative Measurements Versus Receiver Operating Characteristics and Visual Grading Regression in CT Images Reconstructed with Iterative Reconstruction: A Phantom Study

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Quantitative Measurements Versus Receiver Operating Characteristics and Visual Grading Regression in CT Images Reconstructed with Iterative Reconstruction: A Phantom Study

Kristin Jensen et al. Acad Radiol. 2018 Apr.

Abstract

Rationale and objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the correlation of quantitative measurements with visual grading regression (VGR) and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis in computed tomography (CT) images reconstructed with iterative reconstruction.

Materials and methods: CT scans on a liver phantom were performed on CT scanners from GE, Philips, and Toshiba at three dose levels. Images were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and hybrid iterative techniques (ASiR, iDose, and AIDR 3D of different strengths). Images were visually assessed by five readers using a four- and five-grade ordinal scale for liver low contrast lesions and for 10 image quality criteria. The results were analyzed with ROC and VGR. Standard deviation, signal-to-noise ratios, and contrast-to-noise ratios were measured in the images.

Results: All data were compared to FBP. The results of the quantitative measurements were improved for all algorithms. ROC analysis showed improved lesion detection with ASiR and AIDR and decreased lesion detection with iDose. VGR found improved noise properties for all algorithms, increased sharpness with iDose and AIDR, and decreased artifacts from the spine with AIDR, whereas iDose increased the artifacts from the spine. The contrast in the spine decreased with ASiR and iDose.

Conclusions: Improved quantitative measurements in images reconstructed with iterative reconstruction compared to FBP are not equivalent to improved diagnostic image accuracy.

Keywords: CT iterative reconstruction; diagnostic accuracy; quantitative measurements; receiver operating characteristics; visual grading regression.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types