Does iterative reconstruction lower CT radiation dose: evaluation of 15,000 examinations

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 8; no. 11; p. e81141
• Main Authors: Noël, Peter B, Renger, Bernhard, Fiebich, Martin, Münzel, Daniela, Fingerle, Alexander A, Rummeny, Ernst J, Dobritz, Martin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 26-11-2013; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Algorithms; Aorta; Computed tomography; Diagnostic systems; Evaluation; Geometry; Health physics; Humans; I.R. radiation; Image reconstruction; Iterative methods; Materials information; Medical diagnosis; Medical imaging; Noise; Optical character recognition; Patients; Physics; Quality; Radiation; Radiation Dosage; Radiation effects; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; Reduction; Scanners; Sinus; Sinuses; Skull; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; United States > US
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081141

Evaluation of 15,000 computed tomography (CT) examinations to investigate if iterative reconstruction (IR) reduces sustainably radiation exposure.
Information from 15,000 CT examinations was collected, including all aspects of the exams such as scan parameter, patient information, and reconstruction instructions. The examinations were acquired between January 2010 and December 2012, while after 15 months a first generation IR algorithm was installed. To collect the necessary information from PACS, RIS, MPPS and structured reports a Dose Monitoring System was developed. To harvest all possible information an optical character recognition system was integrated, for example to collect information from the screenshot CT-dose report. The tool transfers all data to a database for further processing such as the calculation of effective dose and organ doses. To evaluate if IR provides a sustainable dose reduction, the effective dose values were statistically analyzed with respect to protocol type, diagnostic indication, and patient population.
IR has the potential to reduce radiation dose significantly. Before clinical introduction of IR the average effective dose was 10.1±7.8mSv and with IR 8.9±7.1mSv (p*=0.01). Especially in CTA, with the possibility to use kV reduction protocols, such as in aortic CTAs (before IR: average14.2±7.8mSv; median11.4mSv /with IR:average9.9±7.4mSv; median7.4mSv), or pulmonary CTAs (before IR: average9.7±6.2mSV; median7.7mSv /with IR: average6.4±4.7mSv; median4.8mSv) the dose reduction effect is significant(p*=0.01). On the contrary for unenhanced low-dose scans of the cranial (for example sinuses) the reduction is not significant (before IR:average6.6±5.8mSv; median3.9mSv/with IR:average6.0±3.1mSV; median3.2mSv).
The dose aspect remains a priority in CT research. Iterative reconstruction algorithms reduce sustainably and significantly radiation dose in the clinical routine. Our results illustrate that not only in studies with a limited number of patients but also in the clinical routine, IRs provide long-term dose saving.