These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of radiation dose and image quality from single-energy and dual-energy CT examinations in the same patients screened for hepatocellular carcinoma.
    Author: Purysko AS, Primak AN, Baker ME, Obuchowski NA, Remer EM, John B, Herts BR.
    Journal: Clin Radiol; 2014 Dec; 69(12):e538-44. PubMed ID: 25291959.
    Abstract:
    AIM: To compare radiation dose surrogates [volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), dose-length product (DLP), size-specific dose estimate (SSDE), and effective dose] and image noise in a cohort of patients undergoing hepatocellular carcinoma screening who underwent both single-energy CT (SECT) and dual-energy CT (DECT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective study, 74 adults (mean age 59.5 years) underwent 64 section SECT (120 kVp and weight-based reference mAs) and 128 section dual-source DECT (100/Sn 140 kVp and CTDIvol, adjusted to match the CDTIvol of the SECT protocol) on different occasions. Noise levels were measured in the liver, inferior vena cava (IVC), retroperitoneal (RP) fat, and aorta. Generalized linear models were constructed to compare dose and noise, adjusting for effective diameter. RESULTS: The total DLP (1371.11 mGy-cm, SD = 527.91) and effective dose (20.57 mSv, SD = 7.92) with SECT were significantly higher than the DLP (864.84 mGy-cm, SD = 322.10) and effective dose (12.97 mSv, SD = 4.83) with DECT (p < 0.001). The differences between SECT and DECT increased as the patient's effective diameter increased (p < 0.001). Noise levels in the liver (22.4 versus 21.9 HU), IVC (22.3 versus 23.4 HU), and RP fat (23.5 versus 23 HU) were similar for DECT and SECT (p > 0.05) but were significantly lower in the aorta for DECT (25.3 versus 26.4 HU; p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: DECT imaging of the abdomen can achieve noise levels comparable to those seen with SECT imaging without a dose penalty to patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]