Kazutaka Masamoto1, Shunsuke Fujibayashi2, Bungo Otsuki2, Yasuhiro Fukushima3, Koji Koizumi3, Takayoshi Shimizu2, Yu Shimizu2, Koichi Murata2, Norimasa Ikeda2, Shuichi Matsuda2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 54 Shogoin Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan. masamoto@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 54 Shogoin Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan. 3. Division of Clinical Radiology Service, Kyoto University Hospital, 54 Shogoin Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate radiation dose and image quality of cervical spinal computed tomography scanned with low-radiation dose (LD-CT) utilizing model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). METHODS: We retrospectively examined 14 patients (65.5 ± 13.9 years) who underwent both standard-radiation-dose CT (SD-CT) reconstructed with hybrid iterative reconstruction and LD-CT of cervical spine. The radiation dose, objective image quality indicator, which includes signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise, and subjective image quality score of the anatomical landmarks in the SD-CT and LD-CT were statistically compared. In addition, the measurement errors of the length of C3 vertebrae (height, anteroposterior length, inner and outer pedicle diameters) between SD-CT and LD-CT were analyzed. RESULTS: Radiation dose of LD-CT was reduced to one-sixth of the dose of SD-CT. The objective image quality indicator of LD-CT was significantly better than that of SD-CT. The subjective image quality of LD-CT was relatively worse than that of SD-CT but generally graded as clinically accepted or higher. There was no remarkable difference between SD-CT and LD-CT in the measurement value of height and anteroposterior length. Inner pedicle diameter was significantly (0.21 ± 0.13 mm) smaller, and outer pedicle diameter was (0.24 ± 0.14 mm) larger on LD-CT than on SD-CT. CONCLUSION: Cervical spinal LD-CT that utilized MBIR enabled radical decrease in radiation dose and provided sufficient image quality for clinical use. This scanning protocol can be a good alternative for protecting patients from exposure to unnecessary radiation, especially when a patient requires multiple CT scans.
PURPOSE: To evaluate radiation dose and image quality of cervical spinal computed tomography scanned with low-radiation dose (LD-CT) utilizing model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). METHODS: We retrospectively examined 14 patients (65.5 ± 13.9 years) who underwent both standard-radiation-dose CT (SD-CT) reconstructed with hybrid iterative reconstruction and LD-CT of cervical spine. The radiation dose, objective image quality indicator, which includes signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise, and subjective image quality score of the anatomical landmarks in the SD-CT and LD-CT were statistically compared. In addition, the measurement errors of the length of C3 vertebrae (height, anteroposterior length, inner and outer pedicle diameters) between SD-CT and LD-CT were analyzed. RESULTS: Radiation dose of LD-CT was reduced to one-sixth of the dose of SD-CT. The objective image quality indicator of LD-CT was significantly better than that of SD-CT. The subjective image quality of LD-CT was relatively worse than that of SD-CT but generally graded as clinically accepted or higher. There was no remarkable difference between SD-CT and LD-CT in the measurement value of height and anteroposterior length. Inner pedicle diameter was significantly (0.21 ± 0.13 mm) smaller, and outer pedicle diameter was (0.24 ± 0.14 mm) larger on LD-CT than on SD-CT. CONCLUSION: Cervical spinal LD-CT that utilized MBIR enabled radical decrease in radiation dose and provided sufficient image quality for clinical use. This scanning protocol can be a good alternative for protecting patients from exposure to unnecessary radiation, especially when a patient requires multiple CT scans.
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: Constance de Margerie-Mellon; Cédric de Bazelaire; Claire Montlahuc; Jérôme Lambert; Antoine Martineau; Philippe Coulon; Eric de Kerviler; Catherine Beigelman Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2016-06-23 Impact factor: 3.173