Clinical neuroradiology · 2017
Low-Dose CCT to Exclude Contraindications to Lumbar Puncture : Benefits and Limitations.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Blasel Stella, Alex Sarah, Ackermann Hanns, Tichy Julia, Berkefeld Joachim, Wagner Marlies
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Low-dose cranial computed tomography (LD-CCT) based on iterative reconstruction has been shown to have sufficient image quality to assess cerebrospinal fluid spaces (CSF) and midline structures but not to exclude subtle parenchymal pathologies. Patients without focal neurological deficits often undergo CCT before lumbar puncture (LP) to exclude contraindications to LP including brain herniation or increased CSF pressure. We performed LD-CCT to assess if image quality is appropriate for this indication.
METHODS: A total of 58 LD-CCT (220 mA/120 kV) of patients before LP were retrospectively evaluated and compared to 79 normal standard dose cranial computed tomography (SD-CCT) (350 mA/120 kV). Iterative reconstruction used for both dose levels was increased by one factor for LD-CCT. We assessed the signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), the dose estimates and scored diagnostic image quality by two raters independently. Significance level was set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: The inner and outer CSF spaces except the sulci were equally well depicted by the LD-CCT and SD-CCT; however, depiction of the subtle density differences of the brain parenchyma and the sulci was significantly worse in the LD-CCT (p < 0.0001). The SNR in the gray matter (9.35 vs. 10.61, p < 0.05) and white matter (7.23 vs. 8.15, p < 0.001) were significantly lower in LD-CCT than in SD-CCT with significantly lower dose estimates (1.04 vs. 1.69 mSv, respectively p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The use of LD-CCT with a dose reduction of almost 50% is sufficient to exclude contraindications to LP; however, LD-CCT cannot exclude subtle parenchymal pathologies. Therefore, in patients with suspected parenchymal pathology, SD-CCT is still the method of choice.
METHODS: A total of 58 LD-CCT (220 mA/120 kV) of patients before LP were retrospectively evaluated and compared to 79 normal standard dose cranial computed tomography (SD-CCT) (350 mA/120 kV). Iterative reconstruction used for both dose levels was increased by one factor for LD-CCT. We assessed the signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), the dose estimates and scored diagnostic image quality by two raters independently. Significance level was set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: The inner and outer CSF spaces except the sulci were equally well depicted by the LD-CCT and SD-CCT; however, depiction of the subtle density differences of the brain parenchyma and the sulci was significantly worse in the LD-CCT (p < 0.0001). The SNR in the gray matter (9.35 vs. 10.61, p < 0.05) and white matter (7.23 vs. 8.15, p < 0.001) were significantly lower in LD-CCT than in SD-CCT with significantly lower dose estimates (1.04 vs. 1.69 mSv, respectively p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The use of LD-CCT with a dose reduction of almost 50% is sufficient to exclude contraindications to LP; however, LD-CCT cannot exclude subtle parenchymal pathologies. Therefore, in patients with suspected parenchymal pathology, SD-CCT is still the method of choice.