Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Phantom set-up.

A plastic holder containing a stent with inside a balloon (left upper image) was placed into an anthropomorphic chest phantom (right upper image, bottom image) [2].

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Example of the stents acquired with different protocols: routine dose (195 mAs, 100kV), low dose (195 mAs, 80kV), low dose (80mAs, 80kV).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Noise per dose level for FBP and IR.

The white boxes represent the noise with FBP, while the gray boxes represent the noise with IR. IR resulted in a decrease in noise compared to FBP at the same dose level. FBP Filtered Back Projection, IR Iterative Reconstruction

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

SNR per dose level for FBP and IR.

The white boxes represent the SNR with FBP, while the gray boxes represent the SNR with IR. IR resulted in an increase in SNR compared to FBP at the same dose level. FBP Filtered Back Projection, IR Iterative Reconstruction, SNR Signal-to-noise ratio

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

CNR per dose level for FBP and IR.

The white boxes represent the CNR with FBP, while the gray boxes represent the CNR with IR. IR resulted in an increase in CNR compared to FBP at the same dose level. CNR Contrast-to-noise ratio, FBP Filtered Back Projection, IR Iterative Reconstruction

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 1.

Objective image quality.

Values are presented as median [interquartile range]. The relative difference is the percentage difference compared to FBP at routine dose (reference standard). The value represents the median relative change of the eight acquisitions.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Subjective image quality scores.

Scores are displayed as median [interquartile range]. No significant differences compared to FBP at routine dose were observed. 1 poor, non-diagnostic image quality, 2 moderate, limited diagnostic value, 3 good, diagnostic image quality, 4 excellent, excellent image quality

More »

Table 2 Expand