Literature DB >> 11376264

Single- versus multi-detector row CT of the brain: quality assessment.

T R Jones1, R T Kaplan, B Lane, S W Atlas, G D Rubin.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the quality of brain computed tomographic (CT) studies obtained with a four-channel multi-detector row CT scanner compared with those obtained with a single-detector row CT scanner.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients referred for brain CT were imaged with both single- and multi-detector row scanners. Single-detector row CT images were acquired by using a 5-mm-collimated beam in the transverse mode. Multi-detector row CT images were acquired in four simultaneous 2.5-mm-thick sections, which were combined in projection space to create two contiguous 5-mm-thick sections. Two neuroradiologists blinded to the acquisition technique independently evaluated the CT image pairs, which were presented in a stacked mode on two adjacent monitors. Each study was graded by using a five-point scale for posterior fossa artifact, overall image quality, and overall preference.
RESULTS: Multi-detector row CT studies were acquired 1.8 times faster than single-detector row CT studies (0.92 vs 0.52 section per second). Multi-detector row CT posterior fossa artifact was less than single-detector row CT posterior fossa artifact in 87 (93%) of 94 studies. Overall preference was expressed for multi-detector row CT in 84 (89%) of 94 studies. The differences in mean posterior fossa artifact scores (P <.001) and mean overall image quality scores (P =.001) were significant.
CONCLUSION: Brain CT images obtained with multi-detector row CT resulted in significantly less posterior fossa artifact and were preferred to single-detector row CT images.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11376264     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.219.3.r01jn47750

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  15 in total

1.  Comparison of image quality between conventional and low-dose nonenhanced head CT.

Authors:  Mark E Mullins; Michael H Lev; Peter Bove; Cara E O'Reilly; Sanjay Saini; James T Rhea; James H Thrall; George J Hunter; Leena M Hamberg; R Gilberto Gonzalez
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Prospective, multireader evaluation of image quality and vascular delineation of multislice CT angiography of the brain.

Authors:  Birgit B Ertl-Wagner; Roland Bruening; Jeffrey Blume; Ralf-Thorsten Hoffmann; Brad Snyder; Karin A Herrmann; Maximilian F Reiser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-03-19       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Suitability of helical multislice acquisition technique for routine unenhanced brain CT: an image quality study using a 16-row detector configuration.

Authors:  Danielle Hernalsteen; Guy Cosnard; Annie Robert; Cécile Grandin; Alain Vlassenbroek; Thierry Duprez
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-08-16       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Image quality of multisection CT of the brain: thickly collimated sequential scanning versus thinly collimated spiral scanning with image combining.

Authors:  M van Straten; H W Venema; C B L M Majoie; N J M Freling; C A Grimbergen; G J den Heeten
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Lens exposure during brain scans using multidetector row CT scanners: methods for estimation of lens dose.

Authors:  S Suzuki; S Furui; T Ishitake; T Abe; H Machida; R Takei; K Ibukuro; A Watanabe; T Kidouchi; Y Nakano
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2009-12-31       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  Cranial CT with 64-, 16-, 4- and single-slice CT systems-comparison of image quality and posterior fossa artifacts in routine brain imaging with standard protocols.

Authors:  Birgit Ertl-Wagner; Lara Eftimov; Jeffrey Blume; Roland Bruening; Christoph Becker; Jean Cormack; Hartmut Brueckmann; Maximilian Reiser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-04-04       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Image quality of iterative reconstruction in cranial CT imaging: comparison of model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR).

Authors:  S Notohamiprodjo; Z Deak; F Meurer; F Maertz; F G Mueck; L L Geyer; S Wirth
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Deep learning-based image reconstruction for brain CT: improved image quality compared with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-Veo (ASIR-V).

Authors:  Injoong Kim; Hyunkoo Kang; Hyun Jung Yoon; Bo Mi Chung; Na-Young Shin
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2020-10-10       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 9.  Neuroimaging in traumatic brain imaging.

Authors:  Bruce Lee; Andrew Newberg
Journal:  NeuroRx       Date:  2005-04

10.  Alternative oblique head CT scanning technique reduces bone artifact and improves interpretability of brainstem anatomy.

Authors:  Sam Kampondeni; Gretchen L Birbeck; Robert J Oostveen; Colleen Hammond; Michael J Potchen
Journal:  Neurol Int       Date:  2010-06-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.