Published Online:

For a predominantly pediatric population imaged with 40% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, a mean radiation dose reduction of 39% (2.7/4.4 mGy; range, 23%–72%) was achieved in chest CT and a mean reduction of 29% (4.8/6.8 mGy; range, 20%–64%) was achieved in abdominopelvic CT with no change in image noise magnitude or contrast-to-noise ratio.


To determine a comprehensive method for the implementation of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) for maximal radiation dose reduction in pediatric computed tomography (CT) without changing the magnitude of noise in the reconstructed image or the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in the patient.

Materials and Methods

The institutional review board waived the need to obtain informed consent for this HIPAA-compliant quality analysis. Chest and abdominopelvic CT images obtained before ASIR implementation (183 patient examinations; mean patient age, 8.8 years ± 6.2 [standard deviation]; range, 1 month to 27 years) were analyzed for image noise and CNR. These measurements were used in conjunction with noise models derived from anthropomorphic phantoms to establish new beam current–modulated CT parameters to implement 40% ASIR at 120 and 100 kVp without changing noise texture or magnitude. Image noise was assessed in images obtained after ASIR implementation (492 patient examinations; mean patient age, 7.6 years ± 5.4; range, 2 months to 28 years) the same way it was assessed in the pre-ASIR analysis. Dose reduction was determined by comparing size-specific dose estimates in the pre- and post-ASIR patient cohorts. Data were analyzed with paired t tests.


With 40% ASIR implementation, the average relative dose reduction for chest CT was 39% (2.7/4.4 mGy), with a maximum reduction of 72% (5.3/18.8 mGy). The average relative dose reduction for abdominopelvic CT was 29% (4.8/6.8 mGy), with a maximum reduction of 64% (7.6/20.9 mGy). Beam current modulation was unnecessary for patients weighing 40 kg or less. The difference between 0% and 40% ASIR noise magnitude was less than 1 HU, with statistically nonsignificant increases in patient CNR at 100 kVp of 8% (15.3/14.2; P = .41) for chest CT and 13% (7.8/6.8; P = .40) for abdominopelvic CT.


Radiation dose reduction at pediatric CT was achieved when 40% ASIR was implemented as a dose reduction tool only; no net change to the magnitude of noise in the reconstructed image or the patient CNR occurred.

© RSNA, 2013

Online supplemental material is available for this article.


  • 1. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230(3):619–628.
  • 2. Brady SL, Yee BS, Kaufman RA. Characterization of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm for dose reduction in CT: a pediatric oncology perspective. Med Phys 2012;39(9):5520–5531.
  • 3. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Digumarthy SR, et al. Radiation dose reduction with chest computed tomography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique: initial experience. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2010;34(1):40–45.
  • 4. Singh S, Kalra MK, Shenoy-Bhangle AS, et al. Radiation dose reduction with hybrid iterative reconstruction for pediatric CT. Radiology 2012;263(2):537–546.
  • 5. Vorona GA, Ceschin RC, Clayton BL, Sutcavage T, Tadros SS, Panigrahy A. Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique in children: a feasibility study. Pediatr Radiol 2011;41(9):1174–1182.
  • 6. Cornfeld D, Israel G, Detroy E, Bokhari J, Mojibian H. Impact of Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction (ASIR) on radiation dose and image quality in aortic dissection studies: a qualitative and quantitative analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196(3):W336–W340.
  • 7. Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, Kujak JL, Lawder HJ, Pavlicek W. Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193(3):764–771.
  • 8. Leipsic J, Labounty TM, Heilbron B, et al. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: assessment of image noise and image quality in coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195(3):649–654.
  • 9. Leipsic J, Nguyen G, Brown J, Sin D, Mayo JR. A prospective evaluation of dose reduction and image quality in chest CT using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195(5):1095–1099.
  • 10. Marin D, Nelson RC, Schindera ST, 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(1):145–153.
  • 11. Sagara Y, Hara AK, Pavlicek W, Silva AC, Paden RG, Wu Q, 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(3):713–719.
  • 12. Silva AC, Lawder HJ, Hara A, Kujak J, Pavlicek W. Innovations in CT dose reduction strategy: application of the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(1):191–199.
  • 13. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 2010;257(2):373–383.
  • 14. Kanal KM, Stewart BK, Kolokythas O, Shuman WP. Impact of operator-selected image noise index and reconstruction slice thickness on patient radiation dose in 64-MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189(1):219–225.
  • 15. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations (Task Group 204). College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2011.
  • 16. Brady SL, Kaufman RA. Investigation of American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 204 size-specific dose estimates for pediatric CT implementation. Radiology 2012;265(3):832–840.
  • 17. Brady S, Kaufman R. TH-E-217BCD-03: Image contrast dependent spatial resolution differences for varying levels of ASiR™ implementation. Med Phys 2012;39(6):4015.
  • 18. Richard S, Husarik DB, Yadava G, Murphy SN, Samei E. Towards task-based assessment of CT performance: system and object MTF across different reconstruction algorithms. Med Phys 2012;39(7):4115–4122.

Article History

Received November 20, 2012; revision requested January 2, 2013; revision received February 22; accepted May 14; final version accepted May 23.
Published online: Jan 2014
Published in print: Jan 2014