BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Children with a shunt for hydrocephalus often undergo multiple follow-up head CT scans, increasing the risk for long-term effects of ionizing radiation. The purpose of our study was to evaluate if an unenhanced low-dose head CT could consistently provide acceptable image quality and diagnostic information. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-two children (mean age, 9 years; range, 8 months to 21 years; 45 boys and 47 girls) with a shunt for hydrocephalus and no clinical evidence of shunt malfunction who were referred for a follow-up nonenhanced head CT were included in the study. All studies were performed on a 4-section multidetector CT. Two CT studies were selected retrospectively for each patient, 1 performed at standard dose (220 mA) and 1 at low dose (80 mAs). Two radiologists independently evaluated and graded both standard-dose and low-dose studies for various image quality parameters. Attenuation and noise levels were measured, and gray-white differentiation and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. RESULTS: Low-dose CT resulted in 63% mean dose reduction. All low-dose CT scans were diagnostically acceptable. Image quality parameters were significantly lower at low dose (P = .0001) except for the parameters for streak artifacts (P = .46) and need for further imaging (P = .47), which were higher. Mean noise levels were significantly higher (P = .001) in low-dose studies, whereas CNR was significantly higher in standard dose CT (P = .001). A moderate to perfect agreement was noted between the 2 readers with regard to image quality assessment (65%-99%). CONCLUSION: Low-dose nonenhanced head CT consistently provides diagnostically acceptable images with relevant diagnostic information in children with VP shunts resulting in substantial dose savings.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Children with a shunt for hydrocephalus often undergo multiple follow-up head CT scans, increasing the risk for long-term effects of ionizing radiation. The purpose of our study was to evaluate if an unenhanced low-dose head CT could consistently provide acceptable image quality and diagnostic information. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-two children (mean age, 9 years; range, 8 months to 21 years; 45 boys and 47 girls) with a shunt for hydrocephalus and no clinical evidence of shunt malfunction who were referred for a follow-up nonenhanced head CT were included in the study. All studies were performed on a 4-section multidetector CT. Two CT studies were selected retrospectively for each patient, 1 performed at standard dose (220 mA) and 1 at low dose (80 mAs). Two radiologists independently evaluated and graded both standard-dose and low-dose studies for various image quality parameters. Attenuation and noise levels were measured, and gray-white differentiation and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. RESULTS: Low-dose CT resulted in 63% mean dose reduction. All low-dose CT scans were diagnostically acceptable. Image quality parameters were significantly lower at low dose (P = .0001) except for the parameters for streak artifacts (P = .46) and need for further imaging (P = .47), which were higher. Mean noise levels were significantly higher (P = .001) in low-dose studies, whereas CNR was significantly higher in standard dose CT (P = .001). A moderate to perfect agreement was noted between the 2 readers with regard to image quality assessment (65%-99%). CONCLUSION: Low-dose nonenhanced head CT consistently provides diagnostically acceptable images with relevant diagnostic information in children with VP shunts resulting in substantial dose savings.
Authors: A Aroua; A Besançon; I Buchillier-Decka; P Trueb; J-F Valley; F R Verdun; W Zeller Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry Date: 2004-07-20 Impact factor: 0.972
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
Authors: Hamid Salamipour; Rafael M Jimenez; Sherry L Brec; Vernon M Chapman; Manudeep K Kalra; Diego Jaramillo Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2005-03-18
Authors: L F Donnelly; K H Emery; A S Brody; T Laor; V M Gylys-Morin; C G Anton; S R Thomas; D P Frush Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Mannudeep K Kalra; Stefania Rizzo; Michael M Maher; Elkan F Halpern; Thomas L Toth; Jo-Anne O Shepard; Suzanne L Aquino Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 11.105
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: G A Vorona; G Zuccoli; T Sutcavage; B L Clayton; R C Ceschin; A Panigrahy Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Gareth M Dobson; Arthur K Dalton; Claire L Nicholson; Alistair J Jenkins; Patrick B Mitchell; Christopher J A Cowie Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2019-08-19 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Adam N Wallace; Ross Vyhmeister; Swapnil Bagade; Arindam Chatterjee; Brandon Hicks; Juan Carlos Ramirez-Giraldo; Robert C McKinstry Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 2.804
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