Acute Intracranial Hemorrhage in CT: Benefits of Sinogram-Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction Techniques

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   1. Linton OW,
   2. Mettler FA Jr.

   . National conference on dose reduction in CT, with an emphasis on pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:321–29

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Yates SJ,
   2. Pike LC,
   3. Goldstone KE

   . Effect of multislice scanners on patient dose from routine CT examinations in East Anglia. Br J Radiol 2004;77:472–78

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Brix G,
   2. Nagel HD,
   3. Stamm G,
   4. et al

   . Radiation exposure in multi-slice versus single-slice spiral CT: results of a nationwide survey. Eur Radiol 2003;13:1979–91

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   1. Brenner DJ,
   2. Hall EJ

   . Computed tomography–an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277–84

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   1. Wiest PW,
   2. Locken JA,
   3. Heintz PH,
   4. et al

   . CT scanning: a major source of radiation exposure. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2002;23:402–10

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Schenzle JC,
   2. Sommer WH,
   3. Neumaier K,
   4. et al

   . Dual energy CT of the chest: how about the dose? Invest Radiol 2010;45:347–53

   PubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Vandenberghe S,
   2. D'Asseler Y,
   3. Van de Walle R,
   4. et al

   . Iterative reconstruction algorithms in nuclear medicine. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2001;25:105–11

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Singh S,
   2. Kalra MK,
   3. Gilman MD,
   4. et al

   . Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique for radiation dose reduction in chest CT: a pilot study. Radiology 2011;259:565–73

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   1. Leipsic J,
   2. Labounty TM,
   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
10. 10.↵
    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
11. 11.↵
    1. Flicek KT,
    2. Hara AK,
    3. Silva AC,
    4. et al

    . Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: A pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:126–31

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Schulz B,
    2. Beeres M,
    3. Bodelle B,
    4. et al

    . Performance of iterative image reconstruction in CT of the paranasal sinuses: a phantom study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1072–76

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    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
14. 14.↵
    1. Bulla S,
    2. Blanke P,
    3. Hassepass F,
    4. et al

    . Reducing the radiation dose for low-dose CT of the paranasal sinuses using iterative reconstruction: feasibility and image quality. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:2246–50

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Pontana F,
    2. Duhamel A,
    3. Pagniez J,
    4. et al

    . Chest computed tomography using iterative reconstruction vs filtered back projection (Part 2): image quality of low-dose CT examinations in 80 patients. Eur Radiol 2011;21:636–43

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Birnbaum BA,
    2. Hindman N,
    3. Lee J,
    4. et al

    . Multi-detector row CT attenuation measurements: assessment of intra- and interscanner variability with an anthropomorphic body CT phantom. Radiology 2007;242:109–19

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    1. Ren Q,
    2. Dewan SK,
    3. Li M,
    4. et al

    . Comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques in brain CT. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:2597–601

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    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
19. 19.↵
    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
20. 20.↵
    1. Silva AC,
    2. Lawder HJ,
    3. Hara A,
    4. et al

    . Innovations in CT dose reduction strategy: application of the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:191–99

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    1. Mitsumori LM,
    2. Shuman WP,
    3. Busey JM,
    4. et al

    . Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection in the same patient: 64 channel liver CT image quality and patient radiation dose. Eur Radiol 2012;22:138–43

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    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