BACKGROUND: Most of the applied radiation dose at CT is in the lower photon energy range, which is of limited diagnostic importance. OBJECTIVE: To investigate image quality and effects on radiation parameters of 100-kVp spectral filtration single-energy chest CT using a tin-filter at third-generation dual-source CT in comparison to standard 100-kVp chest CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-three children referred for a non-contrast chest CT performed on a third-generation dual-source CT scanner were examined at 100 kVp with a dedicated tin filter with a tube current-time product resulting in standard protocol dose. We compared resulting images with images from children examined using standard single-source chest CT at 100 kVp. We assessed objective and subjective image quality and compared radiation dose parameters. RESULTS: Radiation dose was comparable for children 5 years old and younger, and it was moderately decreased for older children when using spectral filtration (P=0.006). Effective tube current increased significantly (P=0.0001) with spectral filtration, up to a factor of 10. Signal-to-noise ratio and image noise were similar for both examination techniques (P≥0.06). Subjective image quality showed no significant differences (P≥0.2). CONCLUSION: Using 100-kVp spectral filtration chest CT in children by means of a tube-based tin-filter on a third-generation dual-source CT scanner increases effective tube current up to a factor of 10 to provide similar image quality at equivalent dose compared to standard single-source CT without spectral filtration.
BACKGROUND: Most of the applied radiation dose at CT is in the lower photon energy range, which is of limited diagnostic importance. OBJECTIVE: To investigate image quality and effects on radiation parameters of 100-kVp spectral filtration single-energy chest CT using a tin-filter at third-generation dual-source CT in comparison to standard 100-kVp chest CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-three children referred for a non-contrast chest CT performed on a third-generation dual-source CT scanner were examined at 100 kVp with a dedicated tin filter with a tube current-time product resulting in standard protocol dose. We compared resulting images with images from children examined using standard single-source chest CT at 100 kVp. We assessed objective and subjective image quality and compared radiation dose parameters. RESULTS: Radiation dose was comparable for children 5 years old and younger, and it was moderately decreased for older children when using spectral filtration (P=0.006). Effective tube current increased significantly (P=0.0001) with spectral filtration, up to a factor of 10. Signal-to-noise ratio and image noise were similar for both examination techniques (P≥0.06). Subjective image quality showed no significant differences (P≥0.2). CONCLUSION: Using 100-kVp spectral filtration chest CT in children by means of a tube-based tin-filter on a third-generation dual-source CT scanner increases effective tube current up to a factor of 10 to provide similar image quality at equivalent dose compared to standard single-source CT without spectral filtration.
Authors: C I Henschke; D P Naidich; D F Yankelevitz; G McGuinness; D I McCauley; J P Smith; D Libby; M Pasmantier; M Vazquez; J Koizumi; D Flieder; N Altorki; O S Miettinen Journal: Cancer Date: 2001-07-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Oliver Rompel; Martin Glöckler; Rolf Janka; Sven Dittrich; Robert Cesnjevar; Michael M Lell; Michael Uder; Matthias Hammon Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2016-01-06
Authors: Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael M Maher; Thomas L Toth; Bernhard Schmidt; Bryan L Westerman; Hugh T Morgan; Sanjay Saini Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-10-21 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Sarabjeet Singh; Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael A Moore; Randheer Shailam; Bob Liu; Thomas L Toth; Ellen Grant; Sjirk J Westra Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: John D Mathews; Anna V Forsythe; Zoe Brady; Martin W Butler; Stacy K Goergen; Graham B Byrnes; Graham G Giles; Anthony B Wallace; Philip R Anderson; Tenniel A Guiver; Paul McGale; Timothy M Cain; James G Dowty; Adrian C Bickerstaffe; Sarah C Darby Journal: BMJ Date: 2013-05-21
Authors: Saravanabavaan Suntharalingam; Christian Mikat; Axel Wetter; Nika Guberina; Ahmed Salem; Philipp Heil; Michael Forsting; Kai Nassenstein Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-01-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Matthias Wetzl; Matthias S May; Daniel Weinmann; Matthias Hammon; Christoph Treutlein; Martin Zeilinger; Alexander Kiefer; Regina Trollmann; Joachim Woelfle; Michael Uder; Oliver Rompel Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2020-06-17
Authors: Alexander Wressnegger; Helmut Prosch; Bernhard Moser; Walter Klepetko; Peter Jaksch; Christopher Lambers; Konrad Hoetzenecker; Christian Schestak; Albert De Bettignies; Lucian Beer; Georg Apfaltrer; Helmut Ringl; Paul Apfaltrer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Andreas S Brendlin; Ulrich Schmid; David Plajer; Maryanna Chaika; Markus Mader; Robin Wrazidlo; Simon Männlin; Jakob Spogis; Arne Estler; Michael Esser; Jürgen Schäfer; Saif Afat; Ilias Tsiflikas Journal: Tomography Date: 2022-06-24