BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: CTA is considered the imaging modality of choice in evaluating the supraaortic vessels in many institutions, but radiation exposure remains a matter of concern. The objective of the study was to evaluate a fully automated, attenuation-based kilovolt selection algorithm in carotid CTA in respect to radiation dose and image quality compared with a standard 120-kV protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-eight patients were included: 53 examinations (patient age, 66 ± 12 years) were performed by use of automated adaption of tube potential (80-140 kV) on the basis of the attenuation profile of the scout scan (study group), and 45 examinations (patient age, 67 ± 11 years) were performed by use of a standard 120-kV protocol (control group). CT dose index volume and dose-length product were recorded from the examination protocol. Image quality was assessed by ROI measurements and calculations of SNR and contrast-to-noise ratio. Subjective image quality was evaluated by 2 observers with the use of a 4-point scale (3, excellent; 0, not diagnostic). RESULTS: Subjective image quality was rated as "excellent" or "good" in all examinations (study group, 2.8; control group, 2.8). The algorithm automatically selected 100 kV in 47% and 80 kV in 34%; 120 kV was retained in 19%. An elevation to 140 kV did not occur. Compared with the control group, overall CT dose index volume reduction was 33.7%; overall dose-length product reduction was 31.5%. In the low-kilovolt scans, image noise and mean attenuation of ROIs inside the carotid arteries were significantly higher than in 120-kV scans, resulting in a constant or increased (80-kV group) contrast-to-noise ratio. CONCLUSIONS: The attenuation-based, kilovolt selection algorithm enables a dose reduction of >30% in carotid artery CTA while maintaining contrast-to-noise ratio and subjective image quality at adequate levels.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: CTA is considered the imaging modality of choice in evaluating the supraaortic vessels in many institutions, but radiation exposure remains a matter of concern. The objective of the study was to evaluate a fully automated, attenuation-based kilovolt selection algorithm in carotid CTA in respect to radiation dose and image quality compared with a standard 120-kV protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-eight patients were included: 53 examinations (patient age, 66 ± 12 years) were performed by use of automated adaption of tube potential (80-140 kV) on the basis of the attenuation profile of the scout scan (study group), and 45 examinations (patient age, 67 ± 11 years) were performed by use of a standard 120-kV protocol (control group). CT dose index volume and dose-length product were recorded from the examination protocol. Image quality was assessed by ROI measurements and calculations of SNR and contrast-to-noise ratio. Subjective image quality was evaluated by 2 observers with the use of a 4-point scale (3, excellent; 0, not diagnostic). RESULTS: Subjective image quality was rated as "excellent" or "good" in all examinations (study group, 2.8; control group, 2.8). The algorithm automatically selected 100 kV in 47% and 80 kV in 34%; 120 kV was retained in 19%. An elevation to 140 kV did not occur. Compared with the control group, overall CT dose index volume reduction was 33.7%; overall dose-length product reduction was 31.5%. In the low-kilovolt scans, image noise and mean attenuation of ROIs inside the carotid arteries were significantly higher than in 120-kV scans, resulting in a constant or increased (80-kV group) contrast-to-noise ratio. CONCLUSIONS: The attenuation-based, kilovolt selection algorithm enables a dose reduction of >30% in carotid artery CTA while maintaining contrast-to-noise ratio and subjective image quality at adequate levels.
Authors: Willi A Kalender; Stefanie Buchenau; Paul Deak; Markus Kellermeier; Oliver Langner; Marcel van Straten; Sabrina Vollmar; Sylvia Wilharm Journal: Phys Med Date: 2008-03-10 Impact factor: 2.685
Authors: L S Babiarz; J M Romero; E K Murphy; B Brobeck; P W Schaefer; R G González; M H Lev Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-01-22 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Thomas G Brott; Jonathan L Halperin; Suhny Abbara; J Michael Bacharach; John D Barr; Ruth L Bush; Christopher U Cates; Mark A Creager; Susan B Fowler; Gary Friday; Vicki S Hertzberg; E Bruce McIff; Wesley S Moore; Peter D Panagos; Thomas S Riles; Robert H Rosenwasser; Allen J Taylor Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-02-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Anna Winklehner; Robert Goetti; Stephan Baumueller; Christoph Karlo; Bernhard Schmidt; Rainer Raupach; Thomas Flohr; Thomas Frauenfelder; Hatem Alkadhi Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: M J van Gils; D Vukadinovic; A C van Dijk; D W J Dippel; W J Niessen; A van der Lugt Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: A Eller; M Wiesmüller; W Wüst; R Heiss; M Kopp; M Saake; M Brand; M Uder; M M May Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Matthias S May; Manuel R Kramer; Achim Eller; Wolfgang Wuest; Michael Scharf; Michael Brand; Marc Saake; Bernhard Schmidt; Michael Uder; Michael M Lell Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2014-06-25 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Victor Neuhaus; Nils Große Hokamp; Nuran Abdullayev; Volker Maus; Christoph Kabbasch; Anastasios Mpotsaris; David Maintz; Jan Borggrefe Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Florentino Luciano Caetano Dos Santos; Atte Joutsen; Michelangelo Paci; Juha Salenius; Hannu Eskola Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-05-03 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Manuel Kramer; Stephan Ellmann; Thomas Allmendinger; Achim Eller; Ferdinand Kammerer; Matthias S May; João F Baigger; Michael Uder; Michael M Lell Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 1.889
Authors: Marcel T H Oei; Frederick J A Meijer; Willem-Jan van der Woude; Ewoud J Smit; Bram van Ginneken; Rashindra Manniesing; Mathias Prokop Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-09-21 Impact factor: 5.315