CT Statistical and Iterative Reconstructions and Post Processing

  • Norbert J. PelcEmail author
  • Adam Wang


For decades, CT images were reconstructed from the measured raw data using analytical reconstruction methods, such as filtered backprojection (FBP). While FBP is fast and accurate, the measured data are rarely ideal, and iterative and statistical methods can provide significant benefit particularly when the data quality is poor. They can produce images with lower noise and can also reduce artifacts from system imperfections. However, the resulting images are nonlinear and non-stationary and have other properties that are different from those produced by FBP that should be kept in mind when the images are interpreted.


Image reconstruction Filtered backprojection Iterative reconstruction Statistical reconstruction Edge-preserving smoothing 


  1. 1.
    Hounsfield GN. Computerized transverse axial scanning (tomography): part 1. Description of system. Brit J Radiol. 1973;46:1016–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brooks RA, DiChiro G. Theory of image reconstruction in computed tomography. Radiology. 1975;117:561–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kak AC, Slaney M. Principles of computerized tomographic imaging. New York: IEEE Press; 1988.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nuyts J, De Man B, Fessler JA, Zbijewski W, Beekman FJ. Modelling the physics in the iterative reconstruction for transmission computed tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58(12):R63–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dang H, Stayman JW, Sisniega A, Xu J, Zbijewski W, Wang X, et al. Statistical reconstruction for cone-beam CT with a post-artifact-correction noise model: application to high-quality head imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60(16):6153–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J. A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys. 2007;34(11):4526–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang H, Zeng D, Zhang H, Wang J, Liang Z, Ma J. Applications of nonlocal means algorithm in low-dose X-ray CT image processing and reconstruction: a review. Med Phys. 2017;44:1168–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hsieh SS, Pelc NJ. Limits to dose reduction from iterative reconstruction and the effect of through-slice blurring. Proc SPIE Med Imaging. 2016; 97831C.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chang Z, Zhang R, Thibault JB, Pal D, Fu L, Sauer K, Bouman C. Modeling and pre-treatment of photon-starved CT data for iterative reconstruction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2017;36(1):277–87. Epub 2016 Sep 7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yuki H, Utsunomiya D, Funama Y, Tokuyasu S, Namimoto T, Hirai T, Itatani R, Katahira K, Oshima S, Yamashita Y. Value of knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction in low-kV 256-slice coronary CT angiography. J Cardivasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;4:115–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rohkohl C, Bruder H, Stierstorfer K, Flohr T. Improving best-phase image quality in cardiac CT by motion correction with MAM optimization. Med Phys. 2013;40:031901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Després P, Jia X. A review of GPU-based medical image reconstruction. Phys Med. 2017;42:76–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hsieh J. Computed tomography: principles, design, artifacts, and recent advances. 3rd ed. SPIE. Bellingham: Washington; 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Olcott EW, Shin LK, Sommer G, Chan I, Rosenberg J, Molvin FL, et al. Model-based iterative reconstruction compared to adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and filtered back-projection in CT of the kidneys and the adjacent retroperitoneum. Acad Radiol. 2014;21(6):774–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Wang G, Ye JC, Mueller K, Fessler JA. Image reconstruction is a new frontier of machine learning. IEEE Trans Med Imag. 2018;37(6):1289–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Akagi M, Nakamura Y, Higaki T, Narita K, Honda Y, Zhou J, et al. Deep learning reconstruction improves image quality of abdominal ultra-high-resolution CT. Eur Radiol. 2019 (published online).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    FDA Clears GE’s Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Engine. Imaging Technology News. 2019. Retrieved May 24, 2019, from

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Bioengineering and RadiologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations