Literature DB >> 8668101

Dual-slice spiral versus single-slice spiral scanning: comparison of the physical performance of two computed tomography scanners.

Y Liang1, R A Kruger.   

Abstract

In this paper we deal with two types of spiral scanners; one is a single-slice spiral scanner, while the other employs dual-slice technology into spiral scanning. Physical performance parameters, including image noise, contrast resolution, spatial resolution (transversal and longitudinal), and radiation exposure are measured. Computer simulations based on two interpolation methods (180 degrees and 360 degrees linear interpolation) are also used in evaluating the slice-sensitivity profile (SSP) and noise. The results show that the noise behaves in the same way for both types of scanners. The noise change, relative to that of the standard scan with the same scanning parameters, depends solely on the interpolation algorithm. Table speed and scanner geometry (either single slice or dual slice) have no effect on the noise value. For the given table speed, as well as individual detector collimation (slice width) the dual-slice scan results in better longitudinal resolution (SSP) compared to a single-slice scan if the scan is obtained with nonoverlapping slices (pitch greater than 2). This is because the dual-slice scan obtains twice the number of nonoverlapped projections for the same length, which reduces the degradation of the slice profile by using more densely arranged projections (in the longitudinal direction) for the interpolation. In the dual-slice scanner the workable scan rate is extended up to pitch 4 compared to a pitch of 2 for the single-slice scanner. Therefore, the dual-slice spiral scanner is preferred in applications requiring an increased scan rate with comparative image quality.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8668101     DOI: 10.1118/1.597705

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  8 in total

1.  Influence of detector collimation on SNR in four different MDCT scanners using a reconstructed slice thickness of 5 mm.

Authors:  F R Verdun; A Noel; R Meuli; M Pachoud; P Monnin; J-F Valley; P Schnyder; A Denys
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-07-27       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Cross-sectional vascular imaging with CT and MR angiography.

Authors:  Hasan K Kabul; Klaus D Hagspiel
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 3.  Coronary CT angiography: Diagnostic value and clinical challenges.

Authors:  Akmal Sabarudin; Zhonghua Sun
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2013-12-26

Review 4.  Anniversary paper. Development of x-ray computed tomography: the role of medical physics and AAPM from the 1970s to present.

Authors:  Xiaochuan Pan; Jeffrey Siewerdsen; Patrick J La Riviere; Willi A Kalender
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Radiation exposure in multi-slice versus single-slice spiral CT: results of a nationwide survey.

Authors:  G Brix; H D Nagel; G Stamm; R Veit; U Lechel; J Griebel; M Galanski
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-04-10       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  The quality of reconstructed 3D images in multidetector-row helical CT: experimental study involving scan parameters.

Authors:  Ji Hoon Shin; Ho Kyu Lee; Choong Gon Choi; Dae Chul Suh; Tae Hwan Lim; Weechang Kang
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2002 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 3.500

7.  Comparative evaluation of image quality from three CT simulation scanners.

Authors:  Claire McCann; Hamideh Alasti
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Coronary artery fistula; coronary computed topography--the diagnostic modality of choice.

Authors:  S A Early; T B Meany; H M Fenlon; J Hurley
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2008-07-05       Impact factor: 1.637

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.