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: Image quality evaluation of dual-layer spectral CT in comparison to single-layer CT in a reduced-dose setting.
    Author: Do TD, Rheinheimer S, Kauczor HU, Stiller W, Weber T, Skornitzke S.
    Journal: Eur Radiol; 2020 Oct; 30(10):5709-5719. PubMed ID: 32394278.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate image quality in dual-layer CT (DLCT) compared to single-layer CT (SLCT) in the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis in a reduced-dose setting. METHODS: Intraindividual, retrospective comparisons were performed in 25 patients who received at least one acquisition of all three acquisition protocols SLCTlow (100 kVp), DLCThigh (120 kVp), and DLCTlow (120 kVp), all covering the venous-phase thorax, abdomen, and pelvis with matched CTDIvol between SLCTlow and DLCTlow. Reconstruction parameters were identical between all scans. Image quality was assessed quantitatively at 10 measurement locations in the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis by two independent observers, and subjectively with an intraindividual forced choice test between the three acquisitions. Dose-length product (DLP) and CTDIvol were extracted for dose comparison. RESULTS: Despite matched CTDIvol in acquisition protocols, CTDIvol and DLP were lower for SLCTlow compared to DLCTlow and DLCThigh (DLP 408.58, 444.68, 647.08 mGy·cm, respectively; p < 0.0004), as automated tube current modulation for DLCTlow reached the lower limit in the thorax (mean 66.1 mAs vs limit 65 mAs). Noise and CNR were comparable between SLCTlow and DLCTlow (p values, 0.29-0.51 and 0.05-0.20), but CT numbers were significantly higher for organs and vessels in the upper abdomen for SLCTlow compared to DLCTlow. DLCThigh had significantly better image quality (Noise and CNR). Subjective image quality was superior for DLCThigh, but no difference was found between SLCTlow and DLCTlow. CONCLUSIONS: DLCTlow showed comparable image quality to SLCTlow, with the additional possibility of spectral post-processing. Further dose reduction seems possible by decreasing the lower limit of the tube current for the thorax. KEY POINTS: • Clinical use of reduced-dose DLCT is feasible despite the required higher tube potential. • DLCT with reduced dose shows comparable objective and subjective image quality to reduced-dose SLCT. • Further dose reduction in the thorax might be possible by adjusting mAs thresholds.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]