Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Pediatric Cardiac Computed Tomography: A Comparison Between Sequential and Third-Generation Dual-Source High-Pitch Spiral Techniques

Abstract In this third-generation dual-source CT (DSCT) study, we retrospectively investigated radiation dose and image quality of portal-venous high-pitch emergency CT in 60 patients (28 female, mean age 56 years) with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2. Patients were dichotomized in groups A (median BMI 31.5 kg/m2; n = 33) and B (36.8 kg/m2; n = 27). Volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol), size-specific dose estimate (SSDE), dose length product (DLP) and effective dose (ED) were assessed. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and dose-independent figure-of-merit (FOM) CNR were calculated. Subjective image quality was assessed using a five-point scale. Mean values of CTDIvol, SSDE as well as normalized DLP and ED were 7.6 ± 1.8 mGy, 8.0 ± 1.8 mGy, 304 ± 74 mGy * cm and 5.2 ± 1.3 mSv for group A, and 12.6 ± 3.7 mGy, 11.0 ± 2.6 mGy, 521 ± 157 mGy * cm and 8.9 ± 2.7 mSv for group B (p < 0.001). CNR of the liver and spleen as well as each calculated FOM CNR were significantly higher in group A (p < 0.001). Subjective image quality was good in both groups. In conclusion, third-generation abdominal high-pitch emergency DSCT yields good image quality in obese patients. Radiation dose increases in patients with a BMI > 36.8 kg/m2.

Download Full-text

Dual-source cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) in the follow-up of cardiac transplant: comparison of image quality and radiation dose using three different imaging protocols

European Radiology ◽

10.1007/s00330-015-3650-2 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 25 (8) ◽

pp. 2310-2317 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

D. Beitzke ◽

V. Berger-Kulemann ◽

V. Schöpf ◽

S. Unterhumer ◽

E. Spitzer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Computed Tomography ◽

Image Quality ◽

Radiation Dose ◽

Computed Tomography Angiography ◽

Cardiac Computed Tomography ◽

Cardiac Transplant ◽

Cardiac Computed Tomography Angiography ◽

Imaging Protocols ◽

Dual Source

Download Full-text

Third-generation dual-source computed tomography of the abdomen: comparison of radiation dose and image quality of 80kVp and 80/150kVp with tin filter

10.1101/2020.03.25.007609 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Seung Joon Choi ◽

So Hyun Park ◽

Seong Ho Park ◽

Seong Yong Pak ◽

Jae Won Choi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Computed Tomography ◽

Image Quality ◽

Radiation Dose ◽

Third Generation ◽

Line Density ◽

Oncology Patients ◽

Subjective Image Quality ◽

Dual Source ◽

Lesion Conspicuity ◽

Tin Filter

AbstractObjectiveTo compare the radiation dose, objective and subjective image quality, and diagnostic performances of 80 kVp and 80/150 kVp with tin filter (80/Sn150 kVp) computed tomography (CT) in oncology patients.MethodsOne hundred forty-five consecutive oncology patients who underwent third-generation dual-source dual-energy CT of the abdomen for evaluation of malignant visceral, peritoneal, extraperitoneal, and bone tumor were retrospectively recruited. Two radiologists independently reviewed each observation in 80 kVp CT and 80/Sn150 kVp CT. Modified line-density profile of the tumor and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured. Diagnostic confidence, lesion conspicuity, and subjective image quality were calculated and compared between image sets.ResultsModified line-density profile analysis revealed higher attenuation differences between the tumor and the normal tissue in 80 kVp CT than in 80/Sn150 kVp CT (127 vs. 107, P = 0.05). The 80 kVp CT showed increased CNR in the liver (8.0 vs. 7.6) and the aorta (18.9 vs. 16.3) than the 80/Sn150 kVp CT. The 80 kVp CT yielded higher enhancement of organs (4.9 ± 0.2 vs. 4.7 ± 0.4, P < 0.001) and lesion conspicuity (4.9 ± 0.3 vs. 4.8 ± 0.5, P = 0.035) than the 80/Sn150 kVp CT; overall image quality and confidence index were comparable. The effective dose reduced by 45.2% with 80 kVp CT (2.3 mSv ± 0.9) compared to 80/Sn150 kVp CT (4.1 mSv ± 1.5).ConclusionsThe 80 kVp CT performed similar or better than 80/Sn150 kVp CT for abdominal tumor evaluation with 45.2% radiation dose reduction in oncology patients.

Download Full-text