BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Increasing use of CT for evaluating neurologic disease may expose patients to considerable levels of ionizing radiation. We compared the image quality of low-mAs head CT scans with that of conventional nonenhanced scans. METHODS: Conventional head CT scans were obtained in 20 patients (all >65 years with history of non-CNS malignancy) by using a multidetector technique: 170 mA and 1-second scanning time (ie, 170 mAs), 140 kVp, table speed of 7.5 mm per rotation, pitch of 0.75, section thickness of 5 mm, and field of view of 25 mm. A limited volume helical data acquisition covering four 5-mm-thick images was obtained by using 90 mAs but otherwise the same parameters. Three neuroradiologists visually rated the resulting images for quality in a blinded comparison. Representative 1- to 4-mm(2) regions of interest were chosen in gray matter and white matter locations. Conspicuity and the contrast-to-noise ratio were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were done by using the Student t test. RESULTS: Mean gray matter conspicuity was not significantly different between the 170- and 90-mAs groups (0.39 +/- 0.19 vs 0.41 +/- 0.03, P =.32). Mean gray matter contrast-to-noise ratio was approximately 22% higher with 170 mAs than with 90 mAs (1.77 +/- 0.52 vs 1.39 +/- 0.38, P =.005). All 90-mAs images were rated as having slightly greater image noise than the 170-mAs scans but with sufficient perceived resolution. CONCLUSION: Although 90-mAs head CT images were moderately noisier than 170-mAs images, they were rated as having acceptable diagnostic quality.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Increasing use of CT for evaluating neurologic disease may expose patients to considerable levels of ionizing radiation. We compared the image quality of low-mAs head CT scans with that of conventional nonenhanced scans. METHODS: Conventional head CT scans were obtained in 20 patients (all >65 years with history of non-CNS malignancy) by using a multidetector technique: 170 mA and 1-second scanning time (ie, 170 mAs), 140 kVp, table speed of 7.5 mm per rotation, pitch of 0.75, section thickness of 5 mm, and field of view of 25 mm. A limited volume helical data acquisition covering four 5-mm-thick images was obtained by using 90 mAs but otherwise the same parameters. Three neuroradiologists visually rated the resulting images for quality in a blinded comparison. Representative 1- to 4-mm(2) regions of interest were chosen in gray matter and white matter locations. Conspicuity and the contrast-to-noise ratio were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were done by using the Student t test. RESULTS: Mean gray matter conspicuity was not significantly different between the 170- and 90-mAs groups (0.39 +/- 0.19 vs 0.41 +/- 0.03, P =.32). Mean gray matter contrast-to-noise ratio was approximately 22% higher with 170 mAs than with 90 mAs (1.77 +/- 0.52 vs 1.39 +/- 0.38, P =.005). All 90-mAs images were rated as having slightly greater image noise than the 170-mAs scans but with sufficient perceived resolution. CONCLUSION: Although 90-mAs head CT images were moderately noisier than 170-mAs images, they were rated as having acceptable diagnostic quality.
Authors: Audrey L Spielmann; Joan P Heneghan; Lisa J Lee; Terry Yoshizumi; Rendon C Nelson Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: N Hidajat; M Wolf; A Nunnemann; P Liersch; B Gebauer; U Teichgräber; R J Schröder; R Felix Journal: Radiology Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Mannudeep K Kalra; Srinivasa Prasad; Sanjay Saini; Michael A Blake; Jose Varghese; Elkan F Halpern; James H Thrall; James T Rhea Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: A Korn; M Fenchel; B Bender; S Danz; T K Hauser; D Ketelsen; T Flohr; C D Claussen; M Heuschmid; U Ernemann; H Brodoefel Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-10-27 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Ji Eun Park; Young Hun Choi; Jung-Eun Cheon; Woo Sun Kim; In-One Kim; Hyun Suk Cho; Young Jin Ryu; Yu Jin Kim Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2017-03-14
Authors: Csanad G Varallyay; Eric Nesbit; Rongwei Fu; Seymur Gahramanov; Brendan Moloney; Eric Earl; Leslie L Muldoon; Xin Li; William D Rooney; Edward A Neuwelt Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2013-03-13 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Sigal Trattner; Gregory D N Pearson; Cynthia Chin; Dianna D Cody; Rajiv Gupta; Christopher P Hess; Mannudeep K Kalra; James M Kofler; Mayil S Krishnam; Andrew J Einstein Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Y Murakami; S Kakeda; K Kamada; N Ohnari; J Nishimura; M Ogawa; K Otsubo; Y Morishita; Y Korogi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-11-26 Impact factor: 3.825