Literature DB >> 24142100

A low-radiation exposure protocol for 3D QCT of the spine.

O Museyko1, A Heinemann, M Krause, B Wulff, M Amling, K Püschel, C C Glüer, W Kalender, K Engelke.   

Abstract

SUMMARY: Cadaver and phantom measurements and simulations confirmed that radiation exposure in 3D QCT of the spine can be reduced if 80 kV instead of 120 kV protocols are used; 120 mAs and slice thicknesses of 1-1.3 mm should be usable but obese patient will require higher milliampere-second settings.
PURPOSE: To develop a low-radiation exposure CT acquisition protocol for 3D QCT of the thoracolumbar spine.
METHODS: Twenty-six cadavers were scanned with a standard protocol of 120 kV, 100 mAs and with a low-dose protocol using 90 kV, 150 mAs. The scan range included the vertebrae T6 to L4. Each vertebra was segmented and the integral volume and BMD of the total vertebral body were determined. Effective dose values were estimated. The impact of milliampere-second reduction on image quality was simulated by adding noise.
RESULTS: One hundred ninety-six vertebrae were analyzed. Integral volume as well as integral BMD correlated significantly (p < 0.001) between standard and low-dose protocols (volume, r (2) = 0.991, residual root mean square (RMS) error, 0.77 cm(3); BMD, r (2) = 0.985, RMS error, 4.21 mg/cm(3)). The slope significantly differed from 1 for integral BMD but not for volume hinting at residual field inhomogeneity differences between the two voltage settings that could be corrected by cross-calibration. Compared to the standard protocol, effective dose was reduced by over 50 % in the low-dose protocol. Adding noise in the 90 kV images to simulate a reduction from 150 to 100 mAs did not affect the results for integral volume or BMD.
CONCLUSIONS: For 3D QCT of the spine, depending on scanner type, 80 or 90 kV instead of 120 kV protocols may be considered as an important option to reduce radiation exposure; 120 mAs and slice thicknesses of 1-1.5 mm are usable if segmentation is robust to noise. In obese patients, higher milliampere-second settings will be required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24142100     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-013-2544-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  22 in total

1.  Effective dose values in bone mineral measurements by photon absorptiometry and computed tomography.

Authors:  W A Kalender
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2007

3.  Application- and patient size-dependent optimization of x-ray spectra for CT.

Authors:  Willi A Kalender; Paul Deak; Markus Kellermeier; Marcel van Straten; Sabrina V Vollmar
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Clinical use of quantitative computed tomography and peripheral quantitative computed tomography in the management of osteoporosis in adults: the 2007 ISCD Official Positions.

Authors:  Klaus Engelke; Judith E Adams; Gabriele Armbrecht; Peter Augat; Cesar E Bogado; Mary L Bouxsein; Dieter Felsenberg; Masako Ito; Sven Prevrhal; Didier B Hans; E Michael Lewiecki
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2008 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.617

Review 5.  Quantitative CT for determination of bone mineral density: a review.

Authors:  C E Cann
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  A PC program for estimating organ dose and effective dose values in computed tomography.

Authors:  W A Kalender; B Schmidt; M Zankl; M Schmidt
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Impact of marrow fat on accuracy of quantitative CT.

Authors:  C C Glüer; H K Genant
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1989 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.826

8.  Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise.

Authors:  Yoshiharu Nakayama; Kazuo Awai; Yoshinori Funama; Masahiro Hatemura; Masanori Imuta; Takeshi Nakaura; Da Ryu; Shoji Morishita; Shamima Sultana; Natsuko Sato; Yasuyuki Yamashita
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-10-19       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Effect of tube voltage on CT noise levels in different phantom sizes.

Authors:  Boaz Karmazyn; Yun Liang; Paul Klahr; S Gregory Jennings
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Comparison of low-dose with standard-dose multidetector CT in cervical spine trauma.

Authors:  T H Mulkens; P Marchal; S Daineffe; R Salgado; P Bellinck; B te Rijdt; B Kegelaers; J-L Termote
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 3.825

View more
  4 in total

1.  EOS microdose protocol for the radiological follow-up of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Brice Ilharreborde; Emmanuelle Ferrero; Marianne Alison; Keyvan Mazda
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  A holistic hip fracture approach: individualized diagnosis and treatment after surgery.

Authors:  M Amling; R Oheim; F Barvencik
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2014-01-31       Impact factor: 3.693

3.  Effects of dose reduction on bone strength prediction using finite element analysis.

Authors:  D Anitha; Karupppasamy Subburaj; Kai Mei; Felix K Kopp; Peter Foehr; Peter B Noel; Jan S Kirschke; Thomas Baum
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Concept of a Radiofrequency Device for Osteopenia/Osteoporosis Screening.

Authors:  Sergey N Makarov; Gregory M Noetscher; Seth Arum; Robert Rabiner; Ara Nazarian
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.