OBJECTIVE: This study tests various acquisition and reconstruction protocols for MDCT of the wrist to determine the optimal protocol for obtaining diagnostic image quality with minimal radiation exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty anatomic specimens were examined with an MDCT collimation of 4.0 x 1.0 mm and 2.0 x 0.5 mm (80, 120, and 140 kV; 80, 100, 130, 160, and 200 mA; rotation time, 0.5 0.75, 1.0 sec; pitch, 1.0, 1.3, 1.5, and 2.0). Coronal images were reconstructed using a slice thickness of 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mm with 60% overlap. Three observers evaluated all images independently for gross and fine anatomic detail. Diagnostic confidence was tested using Shrout-Fleiss intraclass correlation coefficients. Interobserver agreement was assessed by Kappa statistics and the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Fine anatomic detail was best presented in 0.5-mm or 1.00-mm reconstructions based on a 2.0 x 0.5 mm acquisition. A rotation time of > or = 0.75 sec resulted in fewer artifacts; a significant dose reduction was achieved with 80 kV and 100 mA at the expense of somewhat increased noise, but without significant loss of anatomic detail in bone presentation. Artifacts were tolerable with a pitch of 1.5 or less. CONCLUSION: MDCT at the described optimal settings allows significant dosage reduction without sacrificing image quality. An acquisition and reconstruction thickness of 0.5 mm results in the best depiction of anatomic detail. A reconstruction thickness of 1.0 mm with a reconstruction interval of 0.5 mm represents a good trade-off between noise and resolution when using low-dose protocols.
OBJECTIVE: This study tests various acquisition and reconstruction protocols for MDCT of the wrist to determine the optimal protocol for obtaining diagnostic image quality with minimal radiation exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty anatomic specimens were examined with an MDCT collimation of 4.0 x 1.0 mm and 2.0 x 0.5 mm (80, 120, and 140 kV; 80, 100, 130, 160, and 200 mA; rotation time, 0.5 0.75, 1.0 sec; pitch, 1.0, 1.3, 1.5, and 2.0). Coronal images were reconstructed using a slice thickness of 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mm with 60% overlap. Three observers evaluated all images independently for gross and fine anatomic detail. Diagnostic confidence was tested using Shrout-Fleiss intraclass correlation coefficients. Interobserver agreement was assessed by Kappa statistics and the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Fine anatomic detail was best presented in 0.5-mm or 1.00-mm reconstructions based on a 2.0 x 0.5 mm acquisition. A rotation time of > or = 0.75 sec resulted in fewer artifacts; a significant dose reduction was achieved with 80 kV and 100 mA at the expense of somewhat increased noise, but without significant loss of anatomic detail in bone presentation. Artifacts were tolerable with a pitch of 1.5 or less. CONCLUSION: MDCT at the described optimal settings allows significant dosage reduction without sacrificing image quality. An acquisition and reconstruction thickness of 0.5 mm results in the best depiction of anatomic detail. A reconstruction thickness of 1.0 mm with a reconstruction interval of 0.5 mm represents a good trade-off between noise and resolution when using low-dose protocols.
Authors: Christos Loupatatzis; Sebastian Schindera; Jan Gralla; Hanno Hoppe; Jan Bittner; Ralph Schröder; Sudesh Srivastav; Harald Marcel Bonel Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-02-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Henrik Olivecrona; Gerald Q Maguire; Marilyn E Noz; Michael P Zeleznik; Uldis Kesteris; Lars Weidenhielm Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2016-02-24 Impact factor: 2.359
Authors: Volker Otten; Gerald Q Maguire; Marilyn E Noz; Michael P Zeleznik; Kjell G Nilsson; Henrik Olivecrona Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2017-01-24 Impact factor: 3.411