Premium
Radiation dose and diagnostic image quality associated with iterative reconstruction in coronary CT angiography: A systematic review
Author(s) -
Abdullah Kamarul Amin,
McEntee Mark F,
Reed Warren,
Kench Peter L
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.31
H-Index - 43
eISSN - 1754-9485
pISSN - 1754-9477
DOI - 10.1111/1754-9485.12473
Subject(s) - medicine , image quality , radiation dose , nuclear medicine , radon transform , dose area product , image noise , effective dose (radiation) , coronary angiography , radiation exposure , significant difference , radiology , image (mathematics) , mathematics , mathematical analysis , artificial intelligence , myocardial infarction , computer science
Summary The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the radiation dose reduction achieved using iterative reconstruction (IR) compared to filtered back projection (FBP) in coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and assess the impact on diagnostic image quality. A systematic search of seven electronic databases was performed to identify all studies using a developed keywords strategy. A total of 14 studies met the criteria and were included in a review analysis. The results showed that there was a significant reduction in radiation dose when using IR compared to FBP ( P < 0.05). The mean and standard deviation (SD) difference of CTDI vol and dose‐length‐product (DLP) were 14.70 ± 6.87 mGy and 186 ± 120 mGy.cm respectively. The mean ± SD difference of effective dose ( E D ) was 2.9 ± 1.7 mSv with the range from 1.0 to 5.0 mSv. The assessment of diagnostic image quality showed no significant difference ( P > 0.05). The mean ± SD difference of image noise, signal‐noise ratio (SNR) and contrast‐noise ratio (CNR) were 1.05 ± 1.29 HU, 0.88 ± 0.56 and 0.63 ± 1.83 respectively. The mean ± SD percentages of overall image quality scores were 71.79 ± 12.29% (FBP) and 67.31 ± 22.96% (IR). The mean ± SD percentages of coronary segment analysis were 95.43 ± 2.57% (FBP) and 97.19 ± 2.62% (IR). In conclusion, this review analysis shows that CCTA with the use of IR leads to a significant reduction in radiation dose as compared to the use of FBP. Diagnostic image quality of IR at reduced dose (30–41%) is comparable to FBP at standard dose in the diagnosis of CAD.