We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Image quality from high-resolution CT of the lung: comparison of axial scans and of sections reconstructed from volumetric data acquired using MDCT.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology 2005 September
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to compare the image quality of reconstructed thin sections obtained from a 16-MDCT scanner with that of axial high-resolution CT scans of the same patient.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients referred for CT of the chest underwent 16-MDCT and, subsequently, axial high-resolution CT. The volumetric raw data from the MDCT scans were reconstructed into slices 2-mm thick using a high-spatial-frequency reconstruction algorithm. Two blinded reviewers independently rated the images from both methods for subjective image-quality criteria. The results were tested for statistical significance using Wilcoxon's signed rank test, and p values of less than 0.05 were considered significant. The effective dose for axial high-resolution CT and volumetric MDCT was calculated.
RESULTS: Motion artifacts were significantly more common on high-resolution CT scans than on reconstructed thin-section images (p < 0.001). The two methods differed significantly in lung attenuation (p = 0.008), mainly because of the presence of ground-glass opacities. The assessment of ground-glass attenuation was superior on axial high-resolution CT. The effective doses were 3.8 mSv for MDCT and 0.9 mSv for high-resolution CT.
CONCLUSION: Reconstructed high-resolution images generated from a single MDCT data acquisition are of comparable quality to images obtained using conventional axial high-resolution CT. However, contiguous MDCT is not recommended for diseases showing predominantly ground-glass patterns, because axial high-resolution CT delineates ground-glass attenuation significantly better.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients referred for CT of the chest underwent 16-MDCT and, subsequently, axial high-resolution CT. The volumetric raw data from the MDCT scans were reconstructed into slices 2-mm thick using a high-spatial-frequency reconstruction algorithm. Two blinded reviewers independently rated the images from both methods for subjective image-quality criteria. The results were tested for statistical significance using Wilcoxon's signed rank test, and p values of less than 0.05 were considered significant. The effective dose for axial high-resolution CT and volumetric MDCT was calculated.
RESULTS: Motion artifacts were significantly more common on high-resolution CT scans than on reconstructed thin-section images (p < 0.001). The two methods differed significantly in lung attenuation (p = 0.008), mainly because of the presence of ground-glass opacities. The assessment of ground-glass attenuation was superior on axial high-resolution CT. The effective doses were 3.8 mSv for MDCT and 0.9 mSv for high-resolution CT.
CONCLUSION: Reconstructed high-resolution images generated from a single MDCT data acquisition are of comparable quality to images obtained using conventional axial high-resolution CT. However, contiguous MDCT is not recommended for diseases showing predominantly ground-glass patterns, because axial high-resolution CT delineates ground-glass attenuation significantly better.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Anti-Arrhythmic Effects of Heart Failure Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy and Their Role in the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: From Beta-Blockers to Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors and Beyond.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 Februrary 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app