English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Purpose: Siemens has developed several iterative reconstruction (IR)algorithms on their CT scanners. SAFIRE is available on most of their CTscanners. The latest algorithm, ADMIRE, is available on their newest high-endCT scanners. The aim of our study was to compare the noise reduction propertiesof the two IR algorithms using objective methods. Methods and Materials: Thehomogeneous module of the Catphan phantom was scanned on a Siemens AS+ and aSiemens Flash CT scanner using an axial abdomen protocol with fixed tubecurrent at two dose levels. The images were reconstructed with an abdomenfilter (B30) using filtered back projection (FBP) and a low, medium, and highlevel of SAFIRE or ADMIRE. Noise Power Spectrum (NPS) curves were calculatedusing these images. Then, an anthropomorphic abdomen phantom (Kyoto KagakuPH-5) was scanned using the same setup and exposure parameters. Fifty axialimages at the same slice location were used to calculate inter-image standarddeviation maps. Results: At full dose, the median values of the NPS curves weresimilar for both scanners at all IR levels. At low dose the median values ofthe NPS curves were generally shifted towards lower spatial frequencies,usually resulting in a more blotchy image texture. This shift was moreprominent for ADMIRE compared to SAFIRE for all IR levels. Based on theinter-image standard deviation maps of the anthropomorphic phantom, ADMIREremoved noise near edges more efficiently than SAFIRE. Conclusion: Nosignificant improvement in maintaining noise structure were found for theADMIRE algorithm. Based on the inter-image standard deviation maps, ADMIREremoved noise near edges more efficiently than SAFIRE.

Admire vs. Safire: Objective comparison of CT reconstruction algorithms and their noise properties