PURPOSE: To provide initial assessment of image quality and dose for a cone-beam computed tomographic (CT) scanner dedicated to extremity imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prototype cone-beam CT scanner has been developed for imaging the extremities, including the weight-bearing lower extremities. Initial technical assessment included evaluation of radiation dose measured as a function of kilovolt peak and tube output (in milliampere seconds), contrast resolution assessed in terms of the signal difference-to-noise ratio (SDNR), spatial resolution semiquantitatively assessed by using a line-pair module from a phantom, and qualitative evaluation of cadaver images for potential diagnostic value and image artifacts by an expert CT observer (musculoskeletal radiologist). RESULTS: The dose for a nominal scan protocol (80 kVp, 108 mAs) was 9 mGy (absolute dose measured at the center of a CT dose index phantom). SDNR was maximized with the 80-kVp scan technique, and contrast resolution was sufficient for visualization of muscle, fat, ligaments and/or tendons, cartilage joint space, and bone. Spatial resolution in the axial plane exceeded 15 line pairs per centimeter. Streaks associated with x-ray scatter (in thicker regions of the patient--eg, the knee), beam hardening (about cortical bone--eg, the femoral shaft), and cone-beam artifacts (at joint space surfaces oriented along the scanning plane--eg, the interphalangeal joints) presented a slight impediment to visualization. Cadaver images (elbow, hand, knee, and foot) demonstrated excellent visibility of bone detail and good soft-tissue visibility suitable to a broad spectrum of musculoskeletal indications. CONCLUSION: A dedicated extremity cone-beam CT scanner capable of imaging upper and lower extremities (including weight-bearing examinations) provides sufficient image quality and favorable dose characteristics to warrant further evaluation for clinical use. RSNA, 2013
PURPOSE: To provide initial assessment of image quality and dose for a cone-beam computed tomographic (CT) scanner dedicated to extremity imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prototype cone-beam CT scanner has been developed for imaging the extremities, including the weight-bearing lower extremities. Initial technical assessment included evaluation of radiation dose measured as a function of kilovolt peak and tube output (in milliampere seconds), contrast resolution assessed in terms of the signal difference-to-noise ratio (SDNR), spatial resolution semiquantitatively assessed by using a line-pair module from a phantom, and qualitative evaluation of cadaver images for potential diagnostic value and image artifacts by an expert CT observer (musculoskeletal radiologist). RESULTS: The dose for a nominal scan protocol (80 kVp, 108 mAs) was 9 mGy (absolute dose measured at the center of a CT dose index phantom). SDNR was maximized with the 80-kVp scan technique, and contrast resolution was sufficient for visualization of muscle, fat, ligaments and/or tendons, cartilage joint space, and bone. Spatial resolution in the axial plane exceeded 15 line pairs per centimeter. Streaks associated with x-ray scatter (in thicker regions of the patient--eg, the knee), beam hardening (about cortical bone--eg, the femoral shaft), and cone-beam artifacts (at joint space surfaces oriented along the scanning plane--eg, the interphalangeal joints) presented a slight impediment to visualization. Cadaver images (elbow, hand, knee, and foot) demonstrated excellent visibility of bone detail and good soft-tissue visibility suitable to a broad spectrum of musculoskeletal indications. CONCLUSION: A dedicated extremity cone-beam CT scanner capable of imaging upper and lower extremities (including weight-bearing examinations) provides sufficient image quality and favorable dose characteristics to warrant further evaluation for clinical use. RSNA, 2013
Authors: David A Jaffray; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen; John W Wong; Alvaro A Martinez Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Debdut Biswas; Jesse E Bible; Michael Bohan; Andrew K Simpson; Peter G Whang; Jonathan N Grauer Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Seppo K Koskinen; Ville V Haapamäki; Jari Salo; Nina C Lindfors; Mika Kortesniemi; Lauri Seppälä; Kimmo T Mattila Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Junguo Bian; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen; Xiao Han; Emil Y Sidky; Jerry L Prince; Charles A Pelizzari; Xiaochuan Pan Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2010-10-20 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Stephan Sehmisch; Christian Dullin; Artur Zaroban; Mohammad Tezval; Thomas Rack; Ullrich Schmelz; Dana Seidlova-Wuttke; Hartmut Dunkelberg; Wolfgang Wuttke; Katharina Marten; Klaus-Michael Stuermer; Ewa Klara Stuermer Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Neil A Segal; Michael C Nevitt; John A Lynch; Jingbo Niu; James C Torner; Ali Guermazi Journal: Phys Sportsmed Date: 2015-08-03 Impact factor: 2.241
Authors: John M Marzo; Melissa A Kluczynski; Corey Clyde; Mark J Anders; Christopher E Mutty; Christopher A Ritter Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2017-12
Authors: Steven Tilley; Matthew Jacobson; Qian Cao; Michael Brehler; Alejandro Sisniega; Wojciech Zbijewski; J Webster Stayman Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: W Zbijewski; A Sisniega; J W Stayman; G Thawait; N Packard; J Yorkston; S Demehri; J Fritz; J H Siewerdsen Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2015-02-21
Authors: Gaurav K Thawait; Shadpour Demehri; Abdullah AlMuhit; Wojciech Zbijweski; John Yorkston; Filippo Del Grande; Bashir Zikria; John A Carrino; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2015-09-12 Impact factor: 3.528