S Takagi1, M Koyama2, K Hayashi3, T Kawauchi3. 1. From the Faculty of Health Sciences (S.T.), Hokkaido University, Hokkaido, Japan rt.stakagi@gmail.com. 2. Radiological Center (M.K.), National Defense Medical College Hospital, Saitama, Japan. 3. Department of Radiology (K.H., T.K.), National Defense Medical College, Saitama, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although skull fractures are generally assessed on bone images obtained by using head CT, the combined multikernel technique that enables evaluation of both brain and bone through a change in the window settings of an image set has been reported. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the image quality required for the accurate assessment of skull fractures by using head CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A random sample of 50 patients (25 nonfracture and 25 simple nondisplaced skull fractures) was selected, and sets of conventional brain and bone images and improved combined multikernel images were reconstructed (4614 images). Three radiologists indicated their confidence levels regarding the presence of skull fractures by marking on a continuous scale for each image set. The mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was calculated for each kernel, and the statistical significance of differences was tested by using the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method. RESULTS: Although a difference in the diagnostic performance of the 3 radiologists was suggested, the mean area under the curve value showed no significant differences among the 3 reconstruction kernels (P = .95 [bone versus combined]), P = .91 [bone versus brain]), and P = .88 [brain versus combined]). However, the quality of brain images was distinctly poorer than the quality of the other 2 images. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the diagnostic performance of brain, bone, and combined multikernel images for skull fractures. Skull fracture diagnosis is made possible by brain image assessments. Combined multikernel images offer the advantage of high-quality brain and bone images.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although skull fractures are generally assessed on bone images obtained by using head CT, the combined multikernel technique that enables evaluation of both brain and bone through a change in the window settings of an image set has been reported. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the image quality required for the accurate assessment of skull fractures by using head CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A random sample of 50 patients (25 nonfracture and 25 simple nondisplaced skull fractures) was selected, and sets of conventional brain and bone images and improved combined multikernel images were reconstructed (4614 images). Three radiologists indicated their confidence levels regarding the presence of skull fractures by marking on a continuous scale for each image set. The mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was calculated for each kernel, and the statistical significance of differences was tested by using the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method. RESULTS: Although a difference in the diagnostic performance of the 3 radiologists was suggested, the mean area under the curve value showed no significant differences among the 3 reconstruction kernels (P = .95 [bone versus combined]), P = .91 [bone versus brain]), and P = .88 [brain versus combined]). However, the quality of brain images was distinctly poorer than the quality of the other 2 images. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the diagnostic performance of brain, bone, and combined multikernel images for skull fractures. Skull fracture diagnosis is made possible by brain image assessments. Combined multikernel images offer the advantage of high-quality brain and bone images.
Authors: Kenneth L Weiss; Rebecca S Cornelius; Aaron L Greeley; Dongmei Sun; I-Yuan Joseph Chang; William O Boyce; Jane L Weiss Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Annemarie M den Harder; Martin J Willemink; Ricardo P J Budde; Arnold M R Schilham; Tim Leiner; Pim A de Jong Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Gunes Orman; Matthias W Wagner; Daniel Seeburg; Carlos A Zamora; Alexander Oshmyansky; Aylin Tekes; Andrea Poretti; George I Jallo; Thierry A G M Huisman; Thangamadhan Bosemani Journal: J Neurosurg Pediatr Date: 2015-07-17 Impact factor: 2.375