Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 22;3(2):e200503. doi: 10.1148/ryct.2021200503

Figure 2:

Effects of varying dose and noise reduction filtering. In this example, the difference in lung volumes between reduced-dose (RD) and standard fixed-dose (FD) scans were negligible and volume adjustment was not applied. (Top) Low-attenuating area less than −950 (LAA−950) differences between the FD, RD, RD-iterative reconstruction (RD-IR), and RD-median filter (RD-MF) scans presented in this study. (Bottom) Lung attenuation histograms for FD, RD, RD-MF, and RD-IR. FBP = filtered back projection.

Effects of varying dose and noise reduction filtering. In this example, the difference in lung volumes between reduced-dose (RD) and standard fixed-dose (FD) scans were negligible and volume adjustment was not applied. (Top) Low-attenuating area less than −950 (LAA−950) differences between the FD, RD, RD-iterative reconstruction (RD-IR), and RD-median filter (RD-MF) scans presented in this study. (Bottom) Lung attenuation histograms for FD, RD, RD-MF, and RD-IR. FBP = filtered back projection.