The Use of Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction in Pediatric Head CT: A Feasibility Study

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Mettler F,
   2. Thomadsen B,
   3. Bhargavan M,
   4. et al

   . Medical radiation exposure in the U.S. in 2006: preliminary results. Health Phys 2008;95:502–07

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Berrington de Gonzalez A,
   2. Mahesh M,
   3. Kim K,
   4. et al

   . Projected cancer risks from computed tomography scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2071–77

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Strauss K,
   2. Goske M,
   3. Kaste S,
   4. et al

   . Image gently: ten steps you can take to optimize image quality and lower CT dose for pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:868–73

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   1. Goske M,
   2. Applegate K,
   3. Bulas D,
   4. et al

   . Image gently: progress and challenges in CT education and advocacy. Pediatr Radiol 2011;41(suppl 2):461–66

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Larson D,
   2. Johnson L,
   3. Schnell B,
   4. et al

   . Rising use of CT in child visits to the emergency department in the United States, 1995–2008. Radiology 2011;259:793–801

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Karlsson P,
   2. Holmberg E,
   3. Lundell M,
   4. et al

   . Intracranial tumors after exposure to ionizing radiation during infancy: a pooled analysis of two Swedish cohorts of 28,008 infants with skin hemangioma. Radiat Res 1998;150:357–64

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Brenner D,
   2. Elliston C,
   3. Hall E,
   4. et al

   . Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:289–96

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   1. Michel M,
   2. Jacob S,
   3. Roger G,
   4. et al

   . Eye lens radiation exposure and repeated head CT scans: a problem to keep in mind. Eur J Radiol 2011 April 11. [Epub ahead of print]
9. 9.↵
   1. Fleischmann D,
   2. Boas F

   . Computed tomography: old ideas and new technology. Eur Radiol 2011;21:510–17

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Prakash P,
    2. Kalra M,
    3. Ackman J,
    4. et al

    . Diffuse lung disease: CT of the chest with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Radiology 2010;256:261–69

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Prakash P,
    2. Kalra M,
    3. Digumarthy S,
    4. et al

    . Radiation dose reduction with chest computed tomography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: initial experience. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2010;34:40–45

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    1. Prakash P,
    2. Kalra M,
    3. Kamboadake A,
    4. et al

    . Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol 2010;45:202–10

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
13. 13.↵
    1. Sagara Y,
    2. Hara A,
    3. Pavlicek W

    . Abdominal CT: comparison of low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection in 53 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:713–19

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Hara AK,
    2. Paden RG,
    3. Silva AG

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

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Gosling O,
    2. Loader R,
    3. Venables P

    . A comparison of radiation dose between state of the art multislice CT coronary angiography with iterative reconstruction, multislice CT coronary angiography with standard filtered back-projection, and invasive diagnostic coronary angiography. Heart 2010;96:922–26

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    1. Heilbron BG,
    2. Leipsic J

    . Submillisievert coronary computed tomography angiography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a new reality. Can J Cardiol 2010;26:35–36

    PubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Leipsic J,
    2. Labounty M,
    3. Heilbron B,
    4. et al

    . Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: assessment of image noise and image quality in coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:649–54

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
18. 18.↵
    1. Cornfield D,
    2. Isreal G,
    3. Detroy E,
    4. et al

    . Impact of Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction (ASIR) on radiation dose and imagine quality in aortic dissection studies: a qualitative and quantitative analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:W336–40

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. 19.↵
    1. Vorona G,
    2. Ceschin R,
    3. Clayton B,
    4. et al

    . Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique in children: a feasibility study. Pediar Radiol 2011;41:1174–82

    CrossRef
20. 20.↵
    1. Mieville F,
    2. Gundinchet F,
    3. Rizzo E,
    4. et al

    . Paediatric cardiac CT examinations: impact of the iterative reconstruction method ASIR on image quality—preliminary findings. Pediatr Radiol 2011;41:1154–64

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Kilic K,
    2. Erbas G,
    3. Guryildirim M

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

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    1. Korn A,
    2. Fenchel M,
    3. Bender B

    . 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
23. 23.↵
    1. Kleinman P,
    2. Strauss K,
    3. Zurakowski,
    4. et al

    . Patient size on CT images as a function of age at a tertiary care children's hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194: 1611–17

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    American College of Radiology. CT Accreditation Phantom Instructions, October 2011. http://www.acr.org/accreditation/computed/qc_forms/Phantom_Testing_Instruction_Final.aspx. Accessed December 28, 2011
25. 25.↵
    1. Kanal K,
    2. Vavilala M,
    3. Raelson C,
    4. et al

    . Variation in pediatric head CT imaging protocols in Washington state. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8:242–50

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Udayasankar U,
    2. Braithwaite K,
    3. Arvantiti M,
    4. et al

    . Low-dose nonenhanced head CT protocol for follow-up evaluation of children with ventriculoperitoneal shunt: reduction of radiation and effect on image quality. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:802–06

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
27. 27.↵
    1. Hopper K,
    2. Neuman J,
    3. King S,
    4. et al

    . Radioprotection to the eye during CT scanning. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001;22:1194–98

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Smith B,
    2. Dillon W,
    3. Gould R,
    4. et al

    . Radiation dose-reduction strategies for neuroradiology CT protocols. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;28:1628–32
29. 29.↵
    1. Mahesh M

    1. Toth T,
    2. Hsieh J

    . Strategies to reduce radiation dose in CT; GE Healthcare MDCT scanner strategies to reduce radiation dose. In: Mahesh M. MDCT Physics: The Basics. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009:115–24
30. 30.↵
    1. Papadakis A,
    2. Perisinakis K,
    3. Oikonomou I,
    4. et al

    . Automatic exposure control in pediatric and adult computed tomography examinations: can we estimate organ and effective dose from mean mAs reduction? Invest Radiol 2011;46:654–62

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Marin D,
    2. Nelson R,
    3. Schindera S,
    4. et al

    . Low-tube-voltage, high-tube-current multidetector abdominal CT: improved image quality and decreased radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm—initial clinical experience. Radiology 2010;254:145–53

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    1. Kambadakone A,
    2. Chaudhary N,
    3. Desai G,
    4. et al

    . Low-Dose MDCT and CT enterography of patients with Crohn disease: feasibility of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:W743–52

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Smith A,
    2. Dillon W,
    3. Lau B,
    4. et al

    . Radiation dose reduction strategy for CT protocols: successful implementation in neuroradiology section. Radiology 2008;247:499–506

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science