Deborah Merzan1, Patrik Nowik1, Gavin Poludniowski1, Robert Bujila1,2. 1. 1 Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, SE-171 76 Stockholm, Sweden. 2. 2 Department of Physics, Royal Institute of Technology, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to make a comprehensive evaluation of how variable scan settings can affect the performance of automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) in recent CT scanners from the four major manufacturers. METHODS: A phantom was designed and manufactured for the purpose of evaluating ATCM. The phantom was scanned with four categories of systematically varied settings (scan projection radiograph, technique and reconstruction parameters and phantom miscentring). The performance of ATCM, in terms of applied tube current and noise uniformity, for the scans with varied settings was compared with a reference scan using subjective and quantitative approaches. RESULTS: The ATCM implemented by each manufacturer is based on different principles and any affect to the performance of the ATCM, when varying scan settings, will manifest differently among the vendors. The results are summarized in four tables corresponding to the categories of varied settings. CONCLUSION: The developed phantom proved useful for evaluating the ATCM. It is important to understand how different implementations (vendor specific) of ATCM perform in order to make informed decisions about the selection of scan settings when designing protocols. The resulting tables can serve as a reference for understanding the different implementations of ATCM and highlight settings that should be taken into consideration when adjusting an imaging protocol. Advances in knowledge: The results from this work can serve as a reference for how changes in geometry or scan settings can affect the performance of ATCM, in terms of tube current and noise.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to make a comprehensive evaluation of how variable scan settings can affect the performance of automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) in recent CT scanners from the four major manufacturers. METHODS: A phantom was designed and manufactured for the purpose of evaluating ATCM. The phantom was scanned with four categories of systematically varied settings (scan projection radiograph, technique and reconstruction parameters and phantom miscentring). The performance of ATCM, in terms of applied tube current and noise uniformity, for the scans with varied settings was compared with a reference scan using subjective and quantitative approaches. RESULTS: The ATCM implemented by each manufacturer is based on different principles and any affect to the performance of the ATCM, when varying scan settings, will manifest differently among the vendors. The results are summarized in four tables corresponding to the categories of varied settings. CONCLUSION: The developed phantom proved useful for evaluating the ATCM. It is important to understand how different implementations (vendor specific) of ATCM perform in order to make informed decisions about the selection of scan settings when designing protocols. The resulting tables can serve as a reference for understanding the different implementations of ATCM and highlight settings that should be taken into consideration when adjusting an imaging protocol. Advances in knowledge: The results from this work can serve as a reference for how changes in geometry or scan settings can affect the performance of ATCM, in terms of tube current and noise.
Authors: Ioannis A Tsalafoutas; Athanasios Varsamidis; Stella Thalassinou; Efstathios P Efstathopoulos Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Chang Hyun Lee; Jin Mo Goo; Hyun Ju Ye; Sung-Joon Ye; Chang Min Park; Eun Ju Chun; Jung-Gi Im Journal: Radiographics Date: 2008 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Yazan Al-Hayek; Xiaoming Zheng; Rob Davidson; Christopher Hayre; Dana Al-Mousa; Campbell Finlay; Kelly Spuur Journal: J Med Radiat Sci Date: 2021-08-17