Journal of thoracic imaging · 2022
Dose Reduction and Image Quality in Photon-counting Detector High-resolution Computed Tomography of the Chest: Routine Clinical Data.
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.
Graafen Dirk, Emrich Tilman, Halfmann Moritz C, Mildenberger Peter, Düber Christoph, Yang Yang, Othman Ahmed E, O' Doherty Jim, Müller Lukas, Kloeckner Roman
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Photon-counting detector computed tomography (PCD-CT) has the potential to significantly improve CT imaging in many ways including, but not limited to, low-dose high-resolution CT (HRCT) of the lung. The aim of this study was to perform an intrapatient comparison of the radiation dose and image quality of PCD-CT compared with conventional energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT).
METHODS: A total of 32 consecutive patients with available PCD-CT and EID-CT HRCT scans were included in the final analysis. The CT dose index (CTDI vol ) was extracted from patient dose reports. Qualitative image analysis comprised the lung parenchyma and mediastinal structures and was assessed by 3 readers using a 5-point Likert scale. Quantitative image analysis included assessment of noise and signal-to-noise ratio in the lung parenchyma, trachea, aorta, muscle, and background.
RESULTS: The mean CTDI vol was 2.0 times higher in the conventional EID-CT scans (1.8±0.5 mGy) compared with PCD-CT (0.9±0.5 mGy, P <0.001). The overall image quality was rated significantly better by all 3 raters ( P <0.001) in the PCD-CT relative to the EID-CT. Quantitative analysis showed no significant differences in noise and signal-to-noise ratio in the lung parenchyma between PCD-CT and EID-CT.
CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional EID-CT scans, PCD-CT demonstrated similar or better objective and subjective image quality at significantly reduced dose levels in an intrapatient comparison. These results and their effect on clinical decision-making should be further investigated in prospective studies.
METHODS: A total of 32 consecutive patients with available PCD-CT and EID-CT HRCT scans were included in the final analysis. The CT dose index (CTDI vol ) was extracted from patient dose reports. Qualitative image analysis comprised the lung parenchyma and mediastinal structures and was assessed by 3 readers using a 5-point Likert scale. Quantitative image analysis included assessment of noise and signal-to-noise ratio in the lung parenchyma, trachea, aorta, muscle, and background.
RESULTS: The mean CTDI vol was 2.0 times higher in the conventional EID-CT scans (1.8±0.5 mGy) compared with PCD-CT (0.9±0.5 mGy, P <0.001). The overall image quality was rated significantly better by all 3 raters ( P <0.001) in the PCD-CT relative to the EID-CT. Quantitative analysis showed no significant differences in noise and signal-to-noise ratio in the lung parenchyma between PCD-CT and EID-CT.
CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional EID-CT scans, PCD-CT demonstrated similar or better objective and subjective image quality at significantly reduced dose levels in an intrapatient comparison. These results and their effect on clinical decision-making should be further investigated in prospective studies.