• Pediatric radiology · Mar 2010

    Comparative Study

    Scan time and patient dose for thoracic imaging in neonates and small children using axial volumetric 320-detector row CT compared to helical 64-, 32-, and 16- detector row CT acquisitions.

    • Lucia J M Kroft, Joost J H Roelofs, and Jacob Geleijns.
    • Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, The Netherlands. L.J.M.Kroft@lumc.nl
    • Pediatr Radiol. 2010 Mar 1;40(3):294-300.

    BackgroundRecently a 320-detector-row CT (MDCT) scanner has become available that allows axial volumetric scanning of a 16-cm-long range (50 cm field of view) in a single 0.35-s rotation. For imaging neonates and small children, volume scanning is potentially of great advantage as the entire scan range can be acquired in 0.35 s, which can reduce motion artefacts and may reduce the need for sedation in clinical CT imaging. Also, because there is no over-ranging associated with axial volumetric scanning, this may reduce patient radiation dose.ObjectiveTo evaluate, by means of a phantom study, scan time and patient dose for thoracic imaging in neonates and small children by using axial cone-beam and helical fan-beam MDCT acquisitions.Materials And MethodsPaediatric imaging protocols were assessed for a 320-MDCT volumetric scanner (Aquilion ONE, Toshiba, Otawara, Japan). The 320-MDCT scanner allows for cone-beam acquisitions with coverage up to 160 mm, but it also allows for helical fan-beam acquisitions in 64-, 32-, or 16-MDCT modes. The acquisition configurations that were evaluated were 320 x 0.5 mm, 240 x 0.5 mm, and 160 x 0.5 mm for axial volumetric scanning, and 64 x 0.5 mm, 32 x 0.5 mm, and 16 x 0.5 mm for helical scanning. Dose assessment was performed for clinically relevant paediatric angiographic or chest/mediastinum acquisition protocols with tube voltages of 80 or 100 kVp and tube currents between 40 and 80 mA.ResultsScan time was 0.35 s for 320-MDCT acquisitions, scan times varied between 1.9 s and 8.3 s for helical acquisitions. Dose savings varying between 18% and 40% were achieved with axial volumetric scanning as compared to helical scanning (for 320- versus 64-MDCT at 160 mm and 80 kVp, and for 320- versus 16-MDCT at 80 mm and 100 kVp, respectively). Statistically significant reduction in radiation dose was found for axial 320-MDCT volumetric scanning compared to helical 64-, 32-, and 16-MDCT scanning.ConclusionAxial thoracic CT of neonates and small children with volumetric 320-MDCT can be performed between 5 and 24 times faster compared to helical scanning and can save patient dose.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…