Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24275806›Full record

ReviewEuropean radiology2014

Quantitative analysis of emphysema and airway measurements according to iterative reconstruction algorithms: comparison of filtered back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and model-based iterative reconstruction.

Ji Yung Choo, Jin Mo Goo, Chang Hyun Lee, Chang Min Park, Sang Joon Park, Mi-Suk Shim

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European radiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Quantitative Emphysema Measurement On Ultra-High-Resolution CT Scans.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ji Yung ChooDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, and Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 110-744, Korea.
Jin Mo Goo
Chang Hyun Lee
Chang Min Park
Sang Joon Park
Mi-Suk Shim

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate filtered back projection (FBP) and two iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms and their effects on the quantitative analysis of lung parenchyma and airway measurements on computed tomography (CT) images.

methodsLow-dose chest CT obtained in 281 adult patients were reconstructed using three algorithms: FBP, adaptive statistical IR (ASIR) and model-based IR (MBIR). Measurements of each dataset were compared: total lung volume, emphysema index (EI), airway measurements of the lumen and wall area as well as average wall thickness. Accuracy of airway measurements of each algorithm was also evaluated using an airway phantom.

resultsEI using a threshold of -950 HU was significantly different among the three algorithms in decreasing order of FBP (2.30 %), ASIR (1.49 %) and MBIR (1.20 %) (P < 0.01). Wall thickness was also significantly different among the three algorithms with FBP (2.09 mm) demonstrating thicker walls than ASIR (2.00 mm) and MBIR (1.88 mm) (P < 0.01). Airway phantom analysis revealed that MBIR showed the most accurate value for airway measurements.

conclusionThe three algorithms presented different EIs and wall thicknesses, decreasing in the order of FBP, ASIR and MBIR. Thus, care should be taken in selecting the appropriate IR algorithm on quantitative analysis of the lung. KEY POINTS: • Computed tomography is increasingly used to provide objective measurements of intra-thoracic structures. • Iterative reconstruction algorithms can affect quantitative measurements of lung and airways. • Care should be taken in selecting reconstruction algorithms in longitudinal analysis. • Model-based iterative reconstruction seems to provide the most accurate airway measurements.

Indexed as

BronchographyModels, BiologicalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsEmphysemaFemaleHumansLungMaleMiddle AgedPhantoms, ImagingRadiographic Image EnhancementRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.