Objective To investigate the image quality, radiation dose and diagnostic value of the low-tube-voltage high-pitch dual-source computed tomography(DSCT) with sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction(SAFIRE) for non-...Objective To investigate the image quality, radiation dose and diagnostic value of the low-tube-voltage high-pitch dual-source computed tomography(DSCT) with sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction(SAFIRE) for non-enhanced abdominal and pelvic scans. Methods This institutional review board-approved prospective study included 64 patients who gave written informed consent for additional abdominal and pelvic scan with DSCT in the period from November to December 2012. The patients underwent standard non-enhanced CT scans(protocol 1) [tube voltage of 120 k Vp/pitch of 0.9/filtered back-projection(FBP) reconstruction] followed by high-pitch non-enhanced CT scans(protocol 2)(100 k Vp/3.0/SAFIRE). The total scan time, mean CT number, signal-to-noise ratio(SNR), image quality, lesion detectability and radiation dose were compared between the two protocols. Results The total scan time of protocol 2 was significantly shorter than that of protocol 1(1.4±0.1 seconds vs. 7.6±0.6 seconds, P<0.001). There was no significant difference between protocol 1 and protocol 2 in mean CT number of all organs(liver, 55.4±6.3 HU vs. 56.1±6.8 HU, P=0.214; pancreas, 43.6±5.9 HU vs. 43.7±5.8 HU, P=0.785; spleen, 47.9±3.9 HU vs. 49.4±4.3 HU, P=0.128; kidney, 32.2±2.3 HU vs. 33.1±2.3 HU, P=0.367; abdominal aorta, 44.8±5.6 HU vs. 45.0±5.5 HU, P=0.499; psoas muscle, 50.7±4.1 HU vs. 50.3±4.5 HU, P=0.279). SNR on images of protocol 2 was higher than that of protocol 1(liver, 5.0±1.2 vs. 4.5±1.1, P<0.001; pancreas, 4.0±1.0 vs. 3.6±0.8, P<0.001; spleen, 4.7±1.0 vs. 4.1±0.9, P<0.001; kidney, 3.1±0.6 vs. 2.8±0.6, P<0.001; abdominal aorta, 4.1±1.0 vs. 3.8±1.0, P<0.001; psoas muscle, 4.5±1.1 vs. 4.3±1.2, P=0.012). The overall image noise of protocol 2 was lower than that of protocol1(9.8±3.1 HU vs. 11.1±3.0 HU, P<0.001). Image quality of protocol 2 was good but lower than that of protocol 1(4.1±0.7 vs. 4.6±0.5, P<0.001). Protocol 2 perceived 229 of 234 lesions(97.9%) that were detected in protocol 1 in the abdomen and pelvis. Radiation dose of protocol 2 was lower than that of protocol 1(4.4±0.4 m Sv vs. 7.3±2.4 m Sv, P<0.001) and the mean dose reduction was 41.4%. Conclusion The high-pitch DSCT with SAFIRE can shorten scan time and reduce radiation dose while preserving image quality in non-enhanced abdominal and pelvic scans.展开更多
Objective To prospectively investigate the diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery stenosis of prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered spiral acquisition mode (high pitch mode) dual-source computed tomography corona...Objective To prospectively investigate the diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery stenosis of prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered spiral acquisition mode (high pitch mode) dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) in patients with relatively higher heart rates (HR) compared with catheter coronary angiography (CCA). Methods Forty-seven consecutive patients with relatively higher HR (>65 and <100 bpm) (20 male, 27 female; age 55±10 years) who both underwent dual-source CTCA and CCA were prospectively included in this study. All patients were performed CTCA using high pitch mode setting at 20%-30% of the R-R interval for the image acquisition. All coronary segments were evaluated by two blinded and independent observers with regard to image quality on a three-point scale (1: excellent to 3: non-diagnostic) and for the presence of significant coronary stenoses (defined as diameter narrowing exceeding 50%). Considered CCA as the standard of reference, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were calculated. Radiation dose values were calculated using the dose-length product. Results Image quality was rated as being score 1 in 92.4% of segments, score 2 in 6.1% of segmentsand score 3 in 1.5% of segments. The average image quality score per segment was 1.064±0.306. The HR variability of patients with image score 1, 2 and 3 were 2.29±1.06 bpm, 5.17±1.37 bpm, 8.88±1.53 bpm, respectively. The average HR variability of patients with different image scores were significantly different (F=170.402, P=0.001). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 92.6%, 97.0%, 87.6%, 98.3%, respectively, per segment and 90.0%, 95.2%, 85.3%, 96.9%, respectively, per vessel and 100%, 63.6%, 90.0%, 100%, respectively, per patient. The effective radiation dose was on average 0.86±0.16 mSv. Conclusion In patients with HR more than 65 bpm and below 100 bpm without cardiac arrhythmia, the prospectively electrocardiogram-gated high-pitch spiral acquisition mode with image acquired timing set at 20%-30% of the R-R interval provides a high diagnostic accuracy for the assessment of coronary stenoses combined with a 1.5% of non-diagnostic coronary segments and a radiation dose below 1 mSv.展开更多
文摘Objective To investigate the image quality, radiation dose and diagnostic value of the low-tube-voltage high-pitch dual-source computed tomography(DSCT) with sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction(SAFIRE) for non-enhanced abdominal and pelvic scans. Methods This institutional review board-approved prospective study included 64 patients who gave written informed consent for additional abdominal and pelvic scan with DSCT in the period from November to December 2012. The patients underwent standard non-enhanced CT scans(protocol 1) [tube voltage of 120 k Vp/pitch of 0.9/filtered back-projection(FBP) reconstruction] followed by high-pitch non-enhanced CT scans(protocol 2)(100 k Vp/3.0/SAFIRE). The total scan time, mean CT number, signal-to-noise ratio(SNR), image quality, lesion detectability and radiation dose were compared between the two protocols. Results The total scan time of protocol 2 was significantly shorter than that of protocol 1(1.4±0.1 seconds vs. 7.6±0.6 seconds, P<0.001). There was no significant difference between protocol 1 and protocol 2 in mean CT number of all organs(liver, 55.4±6.3 HU vs. 56.1±6.8 HU, P=0.214; pancreas, 43.6±5.9 HU vs. 43.7±5.8 HU, P=0.785; spleen, 47.9±3.9 HU vs. 49.4±4.3 HU, P=0.128; kidney, 32.2±2.3 HU vs. 33.1±2.3 HU, P=0.367; abdominal aorta, 44.8±5.6 HU vs. 45.0±5.5 HU, P=0.499; psoas muscle, 50.7±4.1 HU vs. 50.3±4.5 HU, P=0.279). SNR on images of protocol 2 was higher than that of protocol 1(liver, 5.0±1.2 vs. 4.5±1.1, P<0.001; pancreas, 4.0±1.0 vs. 3.6±0.8, P<0.001; spleen, 4.7±1.0 vs. 4.1±0.9, P<0.001; kidney, 3.1±0.6 vs. 2.8±0.6, P<0.001; abdominal aorta, 4.1±1.0 vs. 3.8±1.0, P<0.001; psoas muscle, 4.5±1.1 vs. 4.3±1.2, P=0.012). The overall image noise of protocol 2 was lower than that of protocol1(9.8±3.1 HU vs. 11.1±3.0 HU, P<0.001). Image quality of protocol 2 was good but lower than that of protocol 1(4.1±0.7 vs. 4.6±0.5, P<0.001). Protocol 2 perceived 229 of 234 lesions(97.9%) that were detected in protocol 1 in the abdomen and pelvis. Radiation dose of protocol 2 was lower than that of protocol 1(4.4±0.4 m Sv vs. 7.3±2.4 m Sv, P<0.001) and the mean dose reduction was 41.4%. Conclusion The high-pitch DSCT with SAFIRE can shorten scan time and reduce radiation dose while preserving image quality in non-enhanced abdominal and pelvic scans.
基金Supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of Inner Mongolia, China (20110504)
文摘Objective To prospectively investigate the diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery stenosis of prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered spiral acquisition mode (high pitch mode) dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) in patients with relatively higher heart rates (HR) compared with catheter coronary angiography (CCA). Methods Forty-seven consecutive patients with relatively higher HR (>65 and <100 bpm) (20 male, 27 female; age 55±10 years) who both underwent dual-source CTCA and CCA were prospectively included in this study. All patients were performed CTCA using high pitch mode setting at 20%-30% of the R-R interval for the image acquisition. All coronary segments were evaluated by two blinded and independent observers with regard to image quality on a three-point scale (1: excellent to 3: non-diagnostic) and for the presence of significant coronary stenoses (defined as diameter narrowing exceeding 50%). Considered CCA as the standard of reference, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were calculated. Radiation dose values were calculated using the dose-length product. Results Image quality was rated as being score 1 in 92.4% of segments, score 2 in 6.1% of segmentsand score 3 in 1.5% of segments. The average image quality score per segment was 1.064±0.306. The HR variability of patients with image score 1, 2 and 3 were 2.29±1.06 bpm, 5.17±1.37 bpm, 8.88±1.53 bpm, respectively. The average HR variability of patients with different image scores were significantly different (F=170.402, P=0.001). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 92.6%, 97.0%, 87.6%, 98.3%, respectively, per segment and 90.0%, 95.2%, 85.3%, 96.9%, respectively, per vessel and 100%, 63.6%, 90.0%, 100%, respectively, per patient. The effective radiation dose was on average 0.86±0.16 mSv. Conclusion In patients with HR more than 65 bpm and below 100 bpm without cardiac arrhythmia, the prospectively electrocardiogram-gated high-pitch spiral acquisition mode with image acquired timing set at 20%-30% of the R-R interval provides a high diagnostic accuracy for the assessment of coronary stenoses combined with a 1.5% of non-diagnostic coronary segments and a radiation dose below 1 mSv.
