I Corcuera-Solano1, A H Doshi1, A Noor1, L N Tanenbaum2. 1. From the Department of Neuroradiology, The Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York. 2. From the Department of Neuroradiology, The Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York. nuromri@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients in the neurosurgical intensive care unit undergo multiple head CT scans, resulting in high cumulative radiation exposures. Our aim was to assess the acceptability of a dedicated, special-purpose sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction-based ultra-low-dose CT protocol for neurosurgical intensive care unit surveillance head CT examinations, comparing image quality with studies performed with our standard-of-care sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction low-dose CT and legacy filtered back-projection standard-dose CT protocols. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of 54 head CT examinations: ultra-low-dose CT (n = 22), low-dose CT (n = 12), and standard-dose CT (n = 20) in 22 patients in the neurosurgical intensive care unit. Standard-dose CT was reconstructed by using filtered back-projection on a Somatom Sensation 64 scanner. Ultra-low-dose CT and ultra-low-dose CT examinations were performed on a Siemens AS+128 scanner with commercially available sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction. Qualitative and quantitative parameters, including image quality and dose, were evaluated. RESULTS: Sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction ultra-low-dose CT represented a 68% lower dose index volume compared with filtered back-projection standard-dose CT techniques in the same patients while maintaining similar quality and SNR levels. Sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction low-dose CT offered higher image quality than filtered back-projection standard-dose CT (P < .05) with no differences in SNR at a 24% lower dose index volume. Compared with low-dose CT, ultra-low-dose CT had significantly lower SNR (P = .001) but demonstrated clinically satisfactory measures of image quality. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients in the neurosurgical intensive care unit, dedicated ultra-low-dose CT for surveillance head CT imaging led to a significant dose reduction while maintaining adequate image quality.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Patients in the neurosurgical intensive care unit undergo multiple head CT scans, resulting in high cumulative radiation exposures. Our aim was to assess the acceptability of a dedicated, special-purpose sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction-based ultra-low-dose CT protocol for neurosurgical intensive care unit surveillance head CT examinations, comparing image quality with studies performed with our standard-of-care sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction low-dose CT and legacy filtered back-projection standard-dose CT protocols. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of 54 head CT examinations: ultra-low-dose CT (n = 22), low-dose CT (n = 12), and standard-dose CT (n = 20) in 22 patients in the neurosurgical intensive care unit. Standard-dose CT was reconstructed by using filtered back-projection on a Somatom Sensation 64 scanner. Ultra-low-dose CT and ultra-low-dose CT examinations were performed on a Siemens AS+128 scanner with commercially available sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction. Qualitative and quantitative parameters, including image quality and dose, were evaluated. RESULTS: Sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction ultra-low-dose CT represented a 68% lower dose index volume compared with filtered back-projection standard-dose CT techniques in the same patients while maintaining similar quality and SNR levels. Sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction low-dose CT offered higher image quality than filtered back-projection standard-dose CT (P < .05) with no differences in SNR at a 24% lower dose index volume. Compared with low-dose CT, ultra-low-dose CT had significantly lower SNR (P = .001) but demonstrated clinically satisfactory measures of image quality. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients in the neurosurgical intensive care unit, dedicated ultra-low-dose CT for surveillance head CT imaging led to a significant dose reduction while maintaining adequate image quality.
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: Yoshiko Sagara; Amy K Hara; William Pavlicek; Alvin C Silva; Robert G Paden; Qing Wu Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Martin J Willemink; Tim Leiner; Pim A de Jong; Linda M de Heer; Rutger A J Nievelstein; Arnold M R Schilham; Ricardo P J Budde Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Fabio Becce; Yosr Ben Salah; Francis R Verdun; Bruno C Vande Berg; Frederic E Lecouvet; Reto Meuli; Patrick Omoumi Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2013-01-29 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Antonio Moscariello; Richard A P Takx; U Joseph Schoepf; Matthias Renker; Peter L Zwerner; Terrence X O'Brien; Thomas Allmendinger; Sebastian Vogt; Bernhard Schmidt; Giancarlo Savino; Christian Fink; Lorenzo Bonomo; Thomas Henzler Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-05-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Sarabjeet Singh; Mannudeep K Kalra; Jiang Hsieh; Paul E Licato; Synho Do; Homer H Pien; Michael A Blake Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-09-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: K A Shpilberg; B N Delman; L N Tanenbaum; S J Esses; R Subramaniam; A H Doshi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-07-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Carrie E Zimmerman; Pulkit Khandelwal; Long Xie; Hyunyeol Lee; Hee Kwon Song; Paul A Yushkevich; Arastoo Vossough; Scott P Bartlett; Felix W Wehrli Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2021-04-24 Impact factor: 3.173