B-0721 CT imaging in an emergency setting is not substantially delayed by iterative reconstruction

M.J. Willemink, A.M.R. Schilham, T. Leiner, W.P.T.M. Mali, P.A. de Jong, R.P.J. Budde | Sunday, March 10, 10:30 – 12:00 / Room N/O

Purpose: Iterative reconstruction (IR) is a promising noise reducing technique with the potential to reduce radiation-dose with preserved study interpretability or improve image-quality at similar radiation-dose. One of the major drawbacks of IR is a longer reconstruction time which may be problematic in the emergency setting. The purpose of the current study was to compare reconstruction time and speed of IR and filtered back-projection (FBP) in two commonly encountered emergency imaging scan-protocols: total body trauma CT and pulmonary CTA.
Methods and Materials: Fifteen patients underwent a total body CT after a traumatic event and twenty-five adults underwent a CTA for evaluation of pulmonary embolisms on a 256-slice CT-scanner. All data were reconstructed using FBP and two IR-levels (iDose⁴, Philips Healthcare). Quantification of reconstruction time and speed was done with a self-written plug-in for ImageJ (US National Institutes of Health).
Results: The mean delay in reconstruction time on total body trauma CTs was 44.4±8.1 and 44.9±7.0 seconds for iDose⁴-levels 1 and 6, respectively, and on pulmonary CTAs 10.1±9.6 and 12.0±11.8 seconds for iDose⁴-levels 2 and 4, respectively. The mean reconstruction time and speed for total body trauma CTs were 87.3±14.6, 131.7±16.7 and 132.2±17.9 seconds, and 20.1±1.6, 13.2±0.8 and 13.2±0.6 slices/s for FBP, iDose⁴-levels 1 and 6, respectively, and for pulmonary CTAs 25.5±7.0, 35.6±9.0 and 37.6±12.0 seconds, and 26.7±5.6, 18.7±2.3 and 18.0±2.8 slices/s for FBP, iDose⁴-levels 2 and 4, respectively.
Conclusion: CT image reconstruction in an emergency setting is not delayed substantially by IR. Furthermore, reconstruction time and speed did not differ substantially between different IR-levels.

Be Sociable, Share!

•