Image Quality and Dose Comparison among Screen-Film, Computed, and CT Scanned Projection Radiography: Applications to CT Urography

McCollough, Cynthia H.; Bruesewitz, Michael R.; Vrtiska, Terri J.; King, Bernard F.; LeRoy, Andrew J.; Quam, Jeffrey P.; Hattery, Robert R.

doi:10.1148/radiol.2212000784

Cited by 36 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings correspond with a former phantom study comparing 80 kV and 120 kV [31]. Doseadjusted CNR was higher the greater the slice thickness (2 mm versus 1 mm), as shown in the Siemens scanner with 100 kV and 120 kV.…”

Section: Possibilities Of Dose Reductionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Dose reduction in multidetector CT of the urinary tract. Studies in a phantom model

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A novel ureter phantom was developed for investigations of image quality and dose in CT urography. The ureter phantom consisted of a water box (14 cm x 32 cm x 42 cm) with five parallel plastic tubes (diameter 2.7 mm) filled with different concentrations of contrast media (1.88-30 mg iodine/ml). CT density of the tubes and noise of the surrounding water were determined using two multidetector scanners (Philips MX8000 with four rows, Siemens Sensation 16 with 16 rows) with varying tube current-time product (15-100 mAs per slice), voltage (90 kV, 100 kV, 120 kV), pitch (0.875-1.75), and slice thickness (1 mm, 2 mm, 3.2 mm). Contrast-to-noise ratio as a parameter of image quality was correlated with dose (CTDI) and was compared with image evaluation by two radiologists. The CT densities of different concentrations of contrast media and contrast-to-noise ratio were significantly higher when low voltages (90 kV versus 120 kV, 100 kV versus 120 kV) were applied. Smaller slice thickness (1 mm versus 2 mm) did not change CT density but decreased contrast-to-noise ratio due to increased noise. Contrast phantom studies showed favourable effects of low tube voltage on image quality in the low dose range. This may facilitate substantial dose reduction in CT urography.

show abstract

Section: Possibilities Of Dose Reductionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Dose reduction in multidetector CT of the urinary tract. Studies in a phantom model

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The application of helical CT to the evaluation of the kidneys and urinary tract has been explored over the last 7 years and there is now a significant body of literature related to the investigation of urinary tract calculus disease, renal masses, renal vascularity and renal transplant donor imaging [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. The primary advantage of MDCT over conventional helical scanning is the improvement in volume coverage combining speed with improved resolution allowing thinner slices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hu et al [12] demonstrated that at a variety of section thicknesses and table speeds, images of comparable diagnostic quality with less noise and similar artifact profiles to those from conventional helical CT were obtained using four-detector MDCT at 2-3 times the speed of a single-detector scanner from the same manufacturer. McCollough and Zink [13] showed better spatial resolution with MDCT compared with helical CT. McCollough et al [9] showed improved low-contrast resolution but not spatial resolution of CT urography compared with conventional IVU. McNicholas et al [8] demonstrated similar opacification of the calyces, collecting systems and proximal ureters with excretory helical CT urography using abdominal compression as that seen with conventional IVU.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The application of helical CT and subsequently multidetector-row CT (MDCT) techniques to determine optimal ureteral filling has been described and although the opacification of the ureters in CT urography is considered to be comparable to that in IVU, the quality of the images in terms of calyceal detail, even with multiplanar reformatting, is determined to be inferior to conventional that from IVU, which still remains the gold standard for the examination of the urothelium [8][9][10]. Compared with helical CT, MDCT has the ability to obtain high-resolution images over extended areas of the body during single breath-hold and early clinical results suggest that MDCT urography can be used for evaluation of the urothelium [11].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Improved pelvicalyceal visualization with multidetector computed tomography urography; comparison with helical computed tomography

Raptopoulos

McNamara

2005

Eur Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our aim was to compare the quality of pelvicalyceal visualization on computed tomography (CT) urography using a small intravenous contrast material dose, hydration, and high-resolution multidetector CT (MDCT) with that of conventional helical CT. The test (MDCT) group (49 consecutive patients, 98 kidneys) was scanned 5 min following an intravenous bolus of 30 ml of iodinated contrast material. The control (helical CT) group (50 consecutive patients, 95 kidneys) was scanned 5 min following injection of 120-150 ml of intravenous contrast material. Enhancement and quality of calyceal detail were measured using a five-scale grading system (1 for no detail, 5 for cupped calyces). Calyceal attenuation was substantial in both groups (more than 220 Hounsfield units, HU) but less in the test group compared with the control group (mean 475 and 920 HU, respectively), p<0.0001. In the test group, the calyceal attenuation was less than 500 HU in the majority of cases (65/98 kidneys), while the opposite was true for the control group, where calyceal attenuation was more than 750 HU in 50/95 kidneys (p<0.001). The quality of calyceal detail was 3.4/5 in the test group compared with 1.8/5 in the control group (p<0.0001). The combination of hydration, low-contrast dose, and the high image resolution achieved with MDCT significantly improves calyceal visualization in CT urography.

show abstract

“…Abdominal CT and CTDR are performed with the same scanner, which avoids moving patients between different rooms. The spatial resolution of CTDR images is inferior to conventional radiographs, but contrast resolution and radiation exposure are similar [27,28,30,31]. Sudakoff et al have shown that CT urography plus repeated CTDR images during the excretory phase enable a more complete depiction of the urinary tract than with CT urography alone [28].…”

Section: Hybrid Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding multislice CT urography techniques: many roads lead to Rome

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CT urography has emerged as a serious alternative to conventional urography by utilizing the advantages of modern multislice CT techniques for the visualization of the entire upper urinary tract. Several different examination techniques have been developed in multislice CT (MSCT) urography for improving the opacification and distension of the urinary tract. All efforts in performing MSCT urography have to compromise between the best possible image quality and a reasonably low radiation exposure. Initial low-dose examination protocols are already available. Operating modern MSCT urography properly is not difficult, but it presupposes basic knowledge on the variety of current MSCT urography techniques, including such issues as present-day indications, split-bolus injection, compression, saline infusion, low-dose diuretic administration, hybrid scanning, timing of the acquisition delay, examination protocols, postprocessing, image analysis, and radiation exposure. This article is not intended to provide guidelines of how to conduct MSCT urography, but everyone will be able to understand the functionality of several robust operating MSCT urography techniques, which helps making an individual selection for the clinical practice. In the near future, systematic studies are awaited evaluating the morphologic and diagnostic accuracy of MSCT urography regarding diverse urinary tract disorders.

show abstract

Image Quality and Dose Comparison among Screen-Film, Computed, and CT Scanned Projection Radiography: Applications to CT Urography

Abstract: S-F and CR provided better spatial resolution than did CT SPR. However, CT SPR provided improved low-contrast resolution compared with S-F, at exposures comparable to those used for S-F or CR.

Cited by 36 publications

References 12 publications

Dose reduction in multidetector CT of the urinary tract. Studies in a phantom model

Dose reduction in multidetector CT of the urinary tract. Studies in a phantom model

Improved pelvicalyceal visualization with multidetector computed tomography urography; comparison with helical computed tomography

Understanding multislice CT urography techniques: many roads lead to Rome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About