Literature DB >> 30150031

Flat-panel CT versus 128-slice CT in temporal bone imaging: Assessment of image quality and radiation dose.

Lorenzo Piergallini1, Elisa Scola2, Bruno Tuscano1, Roberto Brambilla3, Mauro Campoleoni3, Gabriella Raimondi3, Luciano Lombardi2, Federica Di Berardino4, Diego Zanetti4, Clara Sina2, Fabio Triulzi5, Giorgio Conte6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We compared the image quality and radiation dose of flat-panel CT (FPCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT) performed respectively with an angiographic unit and a 128-slice CT scanner. We investigated whether the higher spatial resolution of FPCT translated into higher image quality and we sought to eliminate inter-subject variability by scanning temporal bone specimens with both techniques.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen temporal bone specimens were imaged with FPCT and MSCT. Two neuroradiologists experienced in otoradiology evaluated 30 anatomical structures with a 0-2 score; 18 structures important from a clinical perspective were assigned a twofold value in calculation of the overall score. The radiation dose was calculated through the use of an anthropomorphic phantom.
RESULTS: The image quality was significantly higher for FPCT than MSCT for 10 of the 30 anatomical structures; the overall score was also significantly higher for FPCT (p = 0.001). The equivalent dose of the two techniques was very similar, but with different effective doses to the organs.
CONCLUSION: FPCT performed on an angiographic unit provides higher image quality in temporal bone assessment compared to MSCT performed on a 128-slice CT scanner thanks to its higher spatial resolution, with comparable equivalent doses but different effective doses to the organs.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Anatomy; Cone-beam computed tomography; Ear; Multidetector computed tomography; Radiation dosage; Temporal bone

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30150031     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.07.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Hearing rehabilitation with the Vibrant Soundbridge in patients with congenital middle ear malformation].

Authors:  J M Hempel; A Epp; V Volgger
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  Implementation of secondary reconstructions of flat-panel volume computed tomography (fpVCT) and otological planning software for anatomically based cochlear implantation.

Authors:  Franz-Tassilo Müller-Graff; Lukas Ilgen; Philipp Schendzielorz; Johannes Voelker; Johannes Taeger; Anja Kurz; Rudolf Hagen; Tilmann Neun; Kristen Rak
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 3.236

3.  High-speed flat-detector computed tomography for temporal bone imaging and postoperative control of cochlear implants.

Authors:  Felix Eisenhut; Lava Taha; Michael Manhart; Vivian Thimsen; Konstantinos Mantsopoulos; Heinrich Iro; Joachim Hornung; Arnd Dörfler; Stefan Lang
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 2.995

4.  Vestibular Implant Imaging.

Authors:  A Hedjoudje; D P Schoo; B K Ward; J P Carey; C C Della Santina; M Pearl
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-12-24       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 5.  New Frontiers in Managing the Dizzy Patient.

Authors:  Desi P Schoo; Bryan K Ward
Journal:  Otolaryngol Clin North Am       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 1.866

6.  Evaluation of artifacts of cochlear implant electrodes in cone beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Nicholas Bevis; Thomas Effertz; Dirk Beutner; Christian Gueldner
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2020-07-15       Impact factor: 2.503

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.