These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effect of radiation dose reduction and iterative reconstruction on computer-aided detection of pulmonary nodules: Intra-individual comparison.
    Author: Den Harder AM, Willemink MJ, van Hamersvelt RW, Vonken EJ, Milles J, Schilham AM, Lammers JW, de Jong PA, Leiner T, Budde RP.
    Journal: Eur J Radiol; 2016 Feb; 85(2):346-51. PubMed ID: 26781139.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of radiation dose reduction and iterative reconstruction (IR) on the performance of computer-aided detection (CAD) for pulmonary nodules. METHODS: In this prospective study twenty-five patients were included who were scanned for pulmonary nodule follow-up. Image acquisition was performed at routine dose and three reduced dose levels in a single session by decreasing mAs-values with 45%, 60% and 75%. Tube voltage was fixed at 120 kVp for patients ≥ 80 kg and 100 kVp for patients < 80 kg. Data were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP), iDose(4) (levels 1,4,6) and IMR (levels 1-3). All noncalcified solid pulmonary nodules ≥ 4 mm identified by two radiologists in consensus served as the reference standard. Subsequently, nodule volume was measured with CAD software and compared to the reference consensus. The numbers of true-positives, false-positives and missed pulmonary nodules were evaluated as well as the sensitivity. RESULTS: Median effective radiation dose was 2.2 mSv at routine dose and 1.2, 0.9 and 0.6 mSv at respectively 45%, 60% and 75% reduced dose. A total of 28 pulmonary nodules were included. With FBP at routine dose, 89% (25/28) of the nodules were correctly identified by CAD. This was similar at reduced dose levels with FBP, iDose(4) and IMR. CAD resulted in a median number of false-positives findings of 11 per scan with FBP at routine dose (93% of the CAD marks) increasing to 15 per scan with iDose(4) (95% of the CAD marks) and 26 per scan (96% of the CAD marks) with IMR at the lowest dose level. CONCLUSION: CAD can identify pulmonary nodules at submillisievert dose levels with FBP, hybrid and model-based IR. However, the number of false-positive findings increased using hybrid and especially model-based IR at submillisievert dose while dose reduction did not affect the number of false-positives with FBP.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]