liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Kataria, Bharti
    et al.
    Linköping University, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV). Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Department of Radiology in Linköping. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Nilsson Althen, Jonas
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Medical radiation physics.
    Smedby, Örjan
    School of Technology and Health (STH), KTH Royal Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Persson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV). Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Department of Radiology in Linköping.
    Sökjer, Hannibal
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Sandborg, Michael
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Medical radiation physics.
    Assessment of image quality in abdominal CT: potential dose reduction with model-based iterative reconstruction2018In: European Radiology, ISSN 0938-7994, E-ISSN 1432-1084Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose To estimate potential dose reduction in abdominal CT by visually comparing images reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and strengths of 3 and 5 of a specific MBIR.

    Material and methods A dual-source scanner was used to obtain three data sets each for 50 recruited patients with 30, 70 and 100% tube loads (mean CTDIvol 1.9, 3.4 and 6.2 mGy). Six image criteria were assessed independently by five radiologists. Potential dose reduction was estimated with Visual Grading Regression (VGR).

    Results Comparing 30 and 70% tube load, improved image quality was observed as a significant strong effect of log tube load and reconstruction method with potential dose reduction relative to FBP of 22–47% for MBIR strength 3 (p < 0.001). For MBIR strength 5 no dose reduction was possible for image criteria 1 (liver parenchyma), but dose reduction between 34 and 74% was achieved for other criteria. Interobserver reliability showed agreement of 71–76% (κw 0.201–0.286) and intra-observer reliability of 82–96% (κw 0.525–0.783).

    Conclusion MBIR showed improved image quality compared to FBP with positive correlation between MBIR strength and increasing potential dose reduction for all but one image criterion.

  • 2.
    Kataria, Bharti
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Department of Radiology in Linköping. Linköping University, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV).
    Nilsson Althén, Jonas
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Medical radiation physics.
    Smedby, Orjan
    KTH Royal Inst Technol, Sweden.
    Persson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Department of Radiology in Linköping. Linköping University, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV).
    Sökjer-Petersen, Hannibal
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Sandborg, Michael
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Medical radiation physics. Linköping University, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV).
    Assessment of image quality in abdominal computed tomography: Effect of model-based iterative reconstruction, multi-planar reconstruction and slice thickness on potential dose reduction2020In: European Journal of Radiology, ISSN 0720-048X, E-ISSN 1872-7727, Vol. 122, article id 108703Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose: To determine the effect of tube load, model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) strength and slice thickness in abdominal CT using visual comparison of multi-planar reconstruction images. Method: Five image criteria were assessed independently by four radiologists on two data sets at 42- and 98-mAs tube loads for 25 patients examined on a 192-slice dual-source CT scanner. Effect of tube load, MBIR strength, slice thickness and potential dose reduction was estimated with Visual Grading Regression (VGR). Objective image quality was determined by measuring noise (SD), contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratio and noise-power spectra (NPS). Results: Comparing 42- and 98-mAs tube loads, improved image quality was observed as a strong effect of log tube load regardless of MBIR strength (p amp;lt; 0.001). Comparing strength 5 to 3, better image quality was obtained for two criteria (p amp;lt; 0.01), but inferior for liver parenchyma and overall image quality. Image quality was significantly better for slice thicknesses of 2mm and 3mm compared to 1mm, with potential dose reductions between 24%-41%. As expected, with decrease in slice thickness and algorithm strength, the noise power and SD (HU-values) increased, while the CNR decreased. Conclusion: Increasing slice thickness from 1 mm to 2 mm or 3 mm allows for a possible dose reduction. MBIR strength 5 shows improved image quality for three out of five criteria for 1 mm slice thickness. Increasing MBIR strength from 3 to 5 has diverse effects on image quality. Our findings do not support a general recommendation to replace strength 3 by strength 5 in clinical abdominal CT protocols. However, strength 5 may be used in task-based protocols.

  • 3.
    Kataria, Bharti
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Department of Radiology in Linköping. Linköping University, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV).
    Nilsson Althén, Jonas
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Medical radiation physics.
    Smedby, Örjan
    KTH Royal Inst Technol, Sweden.
    Persson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Department of Radiology in Linköping. Linköping University, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV).
    Sökjer-Petersen, Hannibal
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Sandborg, Michael
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Medical radiation physics. Linköping University, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV).
    Image quality and pathology assessment in CT Urography: when is the low-dose series sufficient?2019In: BMC Medical Imaging, ISSN 1471-2342, E-ISSN 1471-2342, Vol. 19, no 1, article id 64Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Background

    Our aim was to compare CT images from native, nephrographic and excretory phases using image quality criteria as well as the detection of positive pathological findings in CT Urography, to explore if the radiation burden to the younger group of patients or patients with negative outcomes can be reduced.

    Methods

    This is a retrospective study of 40 patients who underwent a CT Urography examination on a 192-slice dual source scanner. Image quality was assessed for four specific renal image criteria from the European guidelines, together with pathological assessment in three categories: renal, other abdominal, and incidental findings without clinical significance. Each phase was assessed individually by three radiologists with varying experience using a graded scale. Certainty scores were derived based on the graded assessments. Statistical analysis was performed using visual grading regression (VGR). The limit for significance was set at p = 0.05.

    Results

    For visual reproduction of the renal parenchyma and renal arteries, the image quality was judged better for the nephrogram phase (p < 0.001), whereas renal pelvis/calyces and proximal ureters were better reproduced in the excretory phase compared to the native phase (p < 0.001). Similarly, significantly higher certainty scores were obtained in the nephrogram phase for renal parenchyma and renal arteries, but in the excretory phase for renal pelvis/calyxes and proximal ureters. Assessment of pathology in the three categories showed no statistically significant differences between the three phases. Certainty scores for assessment of pathology, however, showed a significantly higher certainty for renal pathology when comparing the native phase to nephrogram and excretory phase and a significantly higher score for nephrographic phase but only for incidental findings.

    Conclusion

    Visualisation of renal anatomy was as expected with each post-contrast phase showing favourable scores compared to the native phase. No statistically significant differences in the assessment of pathology were found between the three phases. The low-dose CT (LDCT) seems to be sufficient in differentiating between normal and pathological examinations. To reduce the radiation burden in certain patient groups, the LDCT could be considered a suitable alternative as a first line imaging method. However, radiologists should be aware of its limitations.

1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf