期刊文献+

CT dose and image quality in the last three scanner generations 被引量:10

下载PDF
导出
摘要 AIM: To compare the computed tomography(CT) dose and image quality with the filtered back projection against the iterative reconstruction and CT with a minimal electronic noise detector. METHODS: A lung phantom(Chest Phantom N1 by Kyoto Kagaku) was scanned with 3 different CT scanners: the Somatom Sensation, the Definition Flash and the Definition Edge(all from Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The scan parameters were identical to the Siemens presetting for THORAX ROUTINE(scan length 35 cm and FOV 33 cm). Nine different exposition levels were examined(reference mAs/peek voltage): 100/120, 100/100, 100/80, 50/120, 50/100, 50/80, 25/120, 25/100 and 25 mAs/80 kVp. Images from the SOMATOM Sensation were reconstructed using classic filtered back projection. Iterative reconstruction(SAFIRE, level 3) was performed for the two other scanners. A Stellar detector was used with the Somatom Definition Edge. The CT doses were represented by the dose length products(DLPs)(mGycm) provided by the scanners. Signal, contrast, noise and subjective image quality were recorded by two different radiologists with 10 and 3 years of experience in chest CT radiology. To determine the average dose reduction between two scanners, the integral of the dose difference was calculated from the lowest to the highest noise level. RESULTS: When using iterative reconstruction(IR) instead of filtered back projection(FBP), the average dose reduction was 30%, 52% and 80% for bone, soft tissue and air, respectively, for the same image quality(P 【 0.0001). The recently introduced Stellar detector(Sd) lowered the radiation dose by an additional 27%, 54% and 70% for bone, soft tissue and air, respectively(P 【 0.0001). The benefit of dose reduction was larger at lower dose levels. With the same radiation dose, an average of 34%(22%-37%) and 25%(13%-46%) more contrast to noise was achieved by changing from FBP to IR and from IR to Sd, respectively. For the same contrast to noise level, an average of 59%(46%-71%) and 51%(38%-68%) dose reduction was produced for IR and Sd, respectively. For the same subjective image quality, the dose could be reduced by 25%(2%-42%) and 44%(33%-54%) using IR and Sd, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study showed an average dose reduction between 27% and 70% for the new Stellar detector, which is equivalent to using IR instead of FBP. AIM: To compare the computed tomography(CT) dose and image quality with the filtered back projection against the iterative reconstruction and CT with a minimal electronic noise detector. METHODS: A lung phantom(Chest Phantom N1 by Kyoto Kagaku) was scanned with 3 different CT scanners: the Somatom Sensation, the Definition Flash and the Definition Edge(all from Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The scan parameters were identical to the Siemens presetting for THORAX ROUTINE(scan length 35 cm and FOV 33 cm). Nine different exposition levels were examined(reference mAs/peek voltage): 100/120, 100/100, 100/80, 50/120, 50/100, 50/80, 25/120, 25/100 and 25 mAs/80 kVp. Images from the SOMATOM Sensation were reconstructed using classic filtered back projection. Iterative reconstruction(SAFIRE, level 3) was performed for the two other scanners. A Stellar detector was used with the Somatom Definition Edge. The CT doses were represented by the dose length products(DLPs)(mGycm) provided by the scanners. Signal, contrast, noise and subjective image quality were recorded by two different radiologists with 10 and 3 years of experience in chest CT radiology. To determine the average dose reduction between two scanners, the integral of the dose difference was calculated from the lowest to the highest noise level. RESULTS: When using iterative reconstruction(IR) instead of filtered back projection(FBP), the average dose reduction was 30%, 52% and 80% for bone, soft tissue and air, respectively, for the same image quality(P < 0.0001). The recently introduced Stellar detector(Sd) lowered the radiation dose by an additional 27%, 54% and 70% for bone, soft tissue and air, respectively(P < 0.0001). The benefit of dose reduction was larger at lower dose levels. With the same radiation dose, an average of 34%(22%-37%) and 25%(13%-46%) more contrast to noise was achieved by changing from FBP to IR and from IR to Sd, respectively. For the same contrast to noise level, an average of 59%(46%-71%) and 51%(38%-68%) dose reduction was produced for IR and Sd, respectively. For the same subjective image quality, the dose could be reduced by 25%(2%-42%) and 44%(33%-54%) using IR and Sd, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study showed an average dose reduction between 27% and 70% for the new Stellar detector, which is equivalent to using IR instead of FBP.
出处 《World Journal of Radiology》 CAS 2013年第11期421-429,共9页 世界放射学杂志(英文版)(电子版)
关键词 Low DOSE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IMAGE QUALITY DOSE reduction COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY detector IMAGE noise COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY signal to noise Low dose computed tomography Computed tomography image quality Dose reduction Computed tomography detector Image noise Computed tomography signal to noise
  • 相关文献

参考文献43

  • 1Andreas Christe,Margaret C. Lin,Andrew C. Yen,Rich L. Hallett,Kingshuk Roychoudhury,Florian Schmitzberger,Dominik Fleischmann,Ann N. Leung,Geoffry D. Rubin,Peter Vock,Justus E. Roos.CT patterns of fungal pulmonary infections of the lung: Comparison of standard-dose and simulated low-dose CT[J]. European Journal of Radiology . 2011 (10)
  • 2Sebastian T. Schindera,Patricia Graca,Michael A. Patak,Susanne Abderhalden,Gabriel von Allmen,Peter Vock,Zsolt Szucs-Farkas.Thoracoabdominal-Aortoiliac Multidetector-Row CT Angiography at 80 and 100 kVp: Assessment of Image Quality and Radiation Dose[J]. Investigative Radiology . 2009 (10)
  • 3D.J McLaughlin,R.B Mooney.Dose reduction to radiosensitive tissues in CT. Do commercially available shields meet the users’ needs?[J]. Clinical Radiology . 2004 (5)
  • 4Mei-Jui Weng,Ming-Ting Wu,Huay-Ban Pan,Yuen-Yee Kan,Chien-Fang Yang.The feasibility of low-dose CT for pulmonary metastasis in patients with primary gynecologic malignancy[J]. Clinical Imaging . 2004 (6)
  • 5Kenneth D Hopper.Orbital, thyroid, and breast superficial radiation shielding for patients undergoing diagnostic CT[J]. Seminars in Ultrasound, CT, and MRI . 2002 (5)
  • 6O. YUKAWA,T. NAKAJIMA,M. YUKAWA,T. OZAWA,T. YAMADA.Induction of radical scavenging ability and protection against radiation-induced damage to microsomal membranes following low-dose irradiation[J]. International Journal of Radiation Biology . 1999 (9)
  • 7Anna Winklehner,Christoph Karlo,Gilbert Puippe.Raw data-based iterative reconstruction in body CTA: evaluation of radiation dose saving potential. European Radiology . 2011
  • 8Hara Amy K,Paden Robert G,Silva Alvin C,Kujak Jennifer L,Lawder Holly J,Pavlicek William.Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR. American journal of roentgenology . 2009
  • 9Francois Pontana,Alain Duhamel,Julien Pagniez.Chest computed tomography using iterative reconstruction vs filtered back projection (Part 2): image quality of low-dose CT examinations in 80 patients. European Radiology . 2011
  • 10Hopper K D,King S H,Lobell M E,TenHave T R,Weaver J S.The breast: in-plane x-ray protection during diagnostic thoracic CT--shielding with bismuth radioprotective garments. Radiology . 1997

共引文献3

同被引文献42

引证文献10

二级引证文献82

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部