Original Article
Copyright ©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Radiol. Nov 28, 2013; 5(11): 421-429
Published online Nov 28, 2013. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v5.i11.421
Table 1 Reduction of noise and dose using iterative reconstruction and the stellar detector
Soft tissue
Air
Bone
Lowest doseHighest doseLowest doseHighest doseLowest doseHighest dose
Δ HUsdRangeΔ HUsdRangeΔ HUsdRange
Noise reduction from FBP to IR10 (31%)15 (30%)to7 (31%)31 (44%)53 (49%)to22 (41%)64 (30%)128 (37%)to28 (21%)
Noise reduction from IR to IR with Sd7 (32%)16 (42%)to4 (24%)12 (31%)19 (34%)to9 (28%)24 (15%)51 (22%)to9 (7%)
Δ DLPRangeΔ DLPRangeΔ DLPRange
Dose reduction from FBP to IR for the same noise level53 (52%)116 (55%)to25 (50%)133 (80%)165 (78%)to106 (81%)48 (30%)24 (12%)to40 (55%)
Dose reduction from IR to IR with Sd for the same noise level69 (54%)96 (39%)to46 (65%)106 (70%)166 (67%)to65 (72%)35 (27%)33 (21%)to25 (43%)
Table 2 Dose, signal to noise ratio and improved subjective image quality using iterative reconstruction and the stellar detector
Soft tissuelung
△HUsdRange△PointsRange
Lowest doseHighest doseLowest doseHighest dose
Signal to noise reduction from FBP to IR0.7 (36%)0.2 (31%)to1 (39%)Improving subjective image quality from FBP to IR0.2 (7%)0.4 (13%)to0.1 (3%)
Signal to noise reduction from IR to IR with Sd0.6 (38%)0.5 (41%)to0.8 (32%)Improving subjective image quality from IR to IR with Sd0.5 (13%)0.2 (8%)to0.9 (17%)
△DLPRange△DLPRange
Lowest SNRHighest SNRlowest SNRhighest SNR
Dose reduction from FBP to IR for the same SNR59 (45%)20 (40%)to107 (47%)Dose reduction from FBP to IR for same subjective quality19 (25%)22 (42%)to5 (2%)
Dose reduction from IR to IR with Sd for the same SNR52 (41%)23 (49%)to72 (36%)Dose reduction from IR to IR with Sd for same subjective quality57 (44%)10 (33%)to130 (54%)