Can Iterative Reconstruction Improve Imaging Quality for Lower Radiation CT Perfusion? Initial Experience

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   1. Kalra MK,
   2. Prasad S,
   3. Saini S,
   4. et al

   . Clinical comparison of standard-dose and 50% reduced-dose abdominal CT: effect on image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:1101–06

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Hara AK,
   2. Paden RG,
   3. Silva AC,
   4. et al

   . Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:764–71

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Kilic K,
   2. Erbas G,
   3. Guryildirim M,
   4. et al

   . Lowering the dose in head CT using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1578–82

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. Kligerman S,
   2. Mehta D,
   3. Farnadesh M,
   4. et al

   . Use of a hybrid iterative reconstruction technique to reduce image noise and improve image quality in obese patients undergoing computed tomographic pulmonary angiography. J Thorac Imaging 2013;28:49–59

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Rapalino O,
   2. Kamalian S,
   3. Kamalian S,
   4. et al

   . Cranial CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: improved image quality with concomitant radiation dose reduction. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:609–15

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. Korn A,
   2. Fenchel M,
   3. Bender B,
   4. et al

   . Iterative reconstruction in head CT: image quality of routine and low-dose protocols in comparison with standard filtered back-projection. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:218–24

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. Funama Y,
   2. Taguchi K,
   3. Utsunomiya D,
   4. et al

   . Combination of a low-tube-voltage technique with hybrid iterative reconstruction (iDose) algorithm at coronary computed tomographic angiography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2011;35:480–85

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Wintermark M,
   2. Lev MH

   . FDA investigates the safety of brain perfusion CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:2–3

   FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Trojanowska A,
   2. Drop A,
   3. Jargiello T,
   4. et al

   . Changes in cerebral hemodynamics after carotid stenting: evaluation with CT perfusion studies. J Neuroradiol 2006;33:169–74

   PubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Waaijer A,
    2. van Leeuwen MS,
    3. van Osch MJ,
    4. et al

    . Changes in cerebral perfusion after revascularization of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: CT measurement. Radiology 2007;245:541–48

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Konstas AA,
    2. Wintermark M,
    3. Lev MH

    . CT perfusion imaging in acute stroke. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2011;21:215–38

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    1. Mishra N,
    2. Albers G,
    3. Davis S,
    4. et al

    . Mismatch-based delayed thrombolysis: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2010;41:e25–e33

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    1. Abels B,
    2. Klotz E,
    3. Tomandl BF,
    4. et al

    . CT perfusion in acute ischemic stroke: a comparison of 2-second and 1-second temporal resolution. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1632–39

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    1. Hirata M,
    2. Murase K,
    3. Sugawara Y,
    4. et al

    . A method for reducing radiation dose in cerebral CT perfusion study with variable scan schedule. Radiat Med 2005;23:162–69

    PubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Hom J,
    2. Dankbaar JW,
    3. Schneider T,
    4. et al

    . Optimal duration of acquisition for dynamic perfusion CT assessment of blood-brain barrier permeability using the Patlak model. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:1366–70

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    1. Wintermark M,
    2. Smith WS,
    3. Ko NU,
    4. et al

    . Dynamic perfusion CT: optimizing the temporal resolution and contrast volume for calculation of perfusion CT parameters in stroke patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:720–29

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    1. Wintermark M,
    2. Maeder P,
    3. Verdun FR,
    4. et al

    . Using 80 kVp versus 120 kVp in perfusion CT measurement of regional cerebral blood flow. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21:1881–84

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. 18.↵
    1. Kealey SM,
    2. Loving VA,
    3. Delong DM,
    4. et al

    . User-defined vascular input function curves: influence on mean perfusion parameter values and signal-to-noise ratio. Radiology 2004;231:587–93

    PubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Greitz T

    . A radiologic study of the brain circulation by rapid serial angiography of the carotid artery. Acta Radiol Suppl 1956;140:1–123

    PubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Lin CJ,
    2. Hung SC,
    3. Guo WY,
    4. et al

    . Monitoring peri-therapeutic cerebral circulation time: a feasibility study using color-coded quantitative DSA in patients with steno-occlusive arterial disease. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1685–90

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Kudo K,
    2. Sasaki M,
    3. Ogasawara K,
    4. et al

    . Difference in tracer delay-induced effect among deconvolution algorithms in CT perfusion analysis: quantitative evaluation with digital phantoms 1. Radiology 2009;251:241–49

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
22. 22.↵
    1. Kudo K,
    2. Sasaki M,
    3. Stergaard LO,
    4. et al

    . Susceptibility of Tmax to tracer delay on perfusion analysis: quantitative evaluation of various deconvolution algorithms using digital phantoms. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2011;31:908–12

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Konstas AA,
    2. Goldmakher GV,
    3. Lee TY,
    4. et al

    . Theoretic basis and technical implementations of CT perfusion in acute ischemic stroke. Part 1. Theoretic basis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:662–68

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    1. Waaijer A,
    2. van der Schaaf IC,
    3. Velthuis BK,
    4. et al

    . Reproducibility of quantitative CT brain perfusion measurements in patients with symptomatic unilateral carotid artery stenosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:927–32

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    1. Fiorella D,
    2. Heiserman J,
    3. Prenger E,
    4. et al

    . Assessment of the reproducibility of postprocessing dynamic CT perfusion data. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:97–107

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    1. Wang G,
    2. Snyder DL,
    3. O'Sullivan JA,
    4. et al

    . Iterative deblurring for CT metal artifact reduction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1996;15:657–64

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. McCollough CH,
    2. Primak AN,
    3. Braun N,
    4. et al

    . Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiol Clin N Am 2009;47:27–40

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    1. Fardanesh M,
    2. Wang Q,
    3. Mehta D,
    4. et al

    . Evaluation of the impact of major dose reduction for quantitative brain perfusion studies using a low dose simulation algorithm. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of Radiological Society of North America, Chicago, Illinois. November 27–December 2, 2011
29. 29.↵
    1. Nogueira RG,
    2. Schwamm LH,
    3. Hirsch JA

    . Endovascular approaches to acute stroke. Part 1. Drugs, devices, and data. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:649–61

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Paciaroni M,
    2. Caso V,
    3. Agnelli G

    . The concept of ischemic penumbra in acute stroke and therapeutic opportunities. Eur Neurol 2009;61:321–30

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Morhard D,
    2. Wirth CD,
    3. Fesl G,
    4. et al

    . Advantages of extended brain perfusion computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2010;45:363–69

    PubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Smith AB,
    2. Dillon WP,
    3. Gould R,
    4. et al

    . Radiation dose-reduction strategies for neuroradiology CT protocols. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:1628–32

    Abstract/FREE Full Text