Forward-Projected Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction in Screening Low-Dose Chest CT: Comparison With Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D.

Abstract

The objective of this study is to compare forward-projected model-based iterative reconstruction solution (FIRST), a newer fully iterative CT reconstruction method, with adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) in low-dose screening CT for lung cancer. Differences in image noise, image quality, and pulmonary nodule detection, size, and characterization were specifically evaluated. Low-dose chest CT images obtained for 50 consecutive patients between December 2015 and January 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Images were reconstructed using FIRST and AIDR 3D for both lung and soft-tissue reconstruction. Images were independently reviewed to assess image noise, subjective image quality (with use of a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 denoting far superior image quality; 2, superior quality; 3, equivalent quality; 4, inferior quality; and 5, far inferior quality), pulmonary nodule count, size of the largest pulmonary nodule, and characterization of the largest pulmonary nodule (i.e., solid, part solid, or ground glass). Across all 50 cases, measured image noise was lower with FIRST than with AIDR 3D (lung window, 44% reduction, 41 ± 7 vs 74 ± 8 HU, respectively; soft-tissue window, 32% reduction, 11 ± 2 vs 16 ± 2 HU, respectively). Readers subjectively rated images obtained with FIRST as comparable to images obtained with AIDR 3D (mean [± SD] Likert score for FIRST vs AIDR 3D, 3.2 ± 0.3 for soft-tissue reconstructions and 3.0 ± 0.3 for lung reconstructions). For each reader, very good agreement regarding nodule count was noted between FIRST and AIDR 3D (interclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.83 for reader 1 and 0.78 for reader 2). Excellent agreement regarding nodule size (ICC, 0.99 for reader 1 and 0.99 for reader 2) and characterization of the largest nodule (kappa value, 0.92 for reader 1 and 0.82 for reader 2) also existed. Images reconstructed with FIRST are superior to those reconstructed AIDR 3D with regard to image noise and are equivalent with regard to subjective image quality, pulmonary nodule count, and nodule characterization.