The Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (Jun 2020)

Reduced dose iterative reconstruction versus standard dose filtered back projection in detection of bladder tumors

  • Mohamed Sharafeldeen,
  • Mohamed Shaaban,
  • Asmaa Mahmoud Ramadan,
  • Tarek Rashad,
  • Mohamed Elsaqa

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43055-020-00218-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 51, no. 1
pp. 1 – 7

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background The purpose was to assess radiation dose, image quality, and diagnostic performance of reduced-dose scanning with iterative reconstruction (IR) compared with standard-dose with filtered back projection (FBP) with CT urography for detection of bladder tumor. This study was prospectively conducted on 21 patients with bladder masses. All patients were subjected to two scanning protocols: protocol A (standard dose with FBP) and protocol B (additional limited scan to the pelvis at delayed phase with low dose with IR). Based on body weight ( 80 kg), each protocol was subdivided into 2 protocols A1 (130 kVp) and A2 (130 kVp) and protocols B1 (80 kVp) and B2 (110 kVp). Radiation dose was assessed in terms of mean CT dose index (CTDI), Dose-length product (DLP) and effective dose (ED). Image quality and diagnostic accuracy were compared in both groups. Results Mean CTDI, DLP and ED were reduced by average 72.3 % in the 80 kVp protocol (B1) and by 36.3% in 110 kVp (B2) protocol compared to standard-dose protocols. There were significantly lower SNR (signal to noise ratio) between protocol A1 and B1 at aorta and psoas muscles. Subjective image quality analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between the protocol A2 and B2 whereas there were significant differences between protocol A1and B1 as regards to visual image noise and overall image quality. Diagnostic accuracy was identical among different protocols. Conclusion CT urography with IR scanning showed reduced radiation dose and no difference in detection of urothelial carcinomas from standard dose with FBP despite of degraded image quality in 80 kVp scanning.

Keywords