首页>
外文期刊>中国医学科学杂志（英文版）
>Non-enhanced Low-tube-voltage High-pitch Dual-source Computed Tomography with Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm of the Abdomen and Pelvis
【24h】
Non-enhanced Low-tube-voltage High-pitch Dual-source Computed Tomography with Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm of the Abdomen and Pelvis
Objective To investigate the image quality, radiation dose and diagnostic value of the low-tube-voltage high-pitch dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) with sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) for non-enhanced abdominal and pelvic scans. Methods This institutional review board-approved prospective study included 64 patients who gave written informed consent for additional abdominal and pelvic scan with DSCT in the period from November to December 2012. The patients underwent standard non-enhanced CT scans (protocol 1) [tube voltage of 120 kVp/pitch of 0.9/filtered back-projection (FBP) reconstruction] followed by high-pitch non-enhanced CT scans (protocol 2) (100 kVp/3.0/SAFIRE). The total scan time, mean CT number, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), image quality, lesion detectability and radiation dose were compared between the two protocols. Results The total scan time of protocol 2 was significantly shorter than that of protocol 1 (1.4±0.1 seconds vs. 7.6±0.6 seconds, P<0.001). There was no significant difference between protocol 1 and protocol 2 in mean CT number of all organs (liver, 55.4±6.3 HU vs. 56.1±6.8 HU, P=0.214;pancreas, 43.6±5.9 HU vs. 43.7±5.8 HU, P=0.785;spleen, 47.9±3.9 HU vs. 49.4±4.3 HU, P=0.128;kidney, 32.2±2.3 HU vs. 33.1±2.3 HU, P=0.367; abdominal aorta, 44.8±5.6 HU vs. 45.0±5.5 HU, P=0.499; psoas muscle, 50.7±4.1 HU vs. 50.3±4.5 HU, P=0.279). SNR on images of protocol 2 was higher than that of protocol 1 (liver, 5.0±1.2 vs. 4.5±1.1, P<0.001;pancreas, 4.0±1.0 vs. 3.6±0.8, P<0.001;spleen, 4.7±1.0 vs. 4.1±0.9, P<0.001;kidney, 3.1±0.6 vs. 2.8±0.6, P<0.001;abdominal aorta, 4.1±1.0 vs. 3.8±1.0, P<0.001;psoas muscle, 4.5±1.1 vs. 4.3±1.2, P=0.012). The overall image noise of protocol 2 was lower than that of protocol 1 (9.8±3.1 HU vs. 11.1±3.0 HU, P<0.001). Image quality of protocol 2 was good but lower than that of protocol 1 (4.1±0.7 vs. 4.6±0.5, P<0.001). Protocol 2 perceived 229 of 234 lesions (97.9%) that were detected in protocol 1 in the abdomen and pelvis. Radiation dose of protocol 2 was lower than that of protocol 1 (4.4±0.4 mSv vs. 7.3±2.4 mSv, P<0.001) and the mean dose reduction was 41.4%. Conclusion The high-pitch DSCT with SAFIRE can shorten scan time and reduce radiation dose while preserving image quality in non-enhanced abdominal and pelvic scans.
展开▼
机译：目的探讨低管电压高音高双源计算机断层扫描（DSCT）结合正弦图确证的迭代重建（SAFIRE）的图像质量，辐射剂量及其对非增强型腹部和骨盆扫描的诊断价值。 方法该方法获得了机构审查委员会批准的前瞻性研究，其中包括64例在2012年11月至2012年12月期间进行DSCT的腹部和骨盆附加扫描的知情同意书的患者。患者接受了标准的非增强CT扫描（协议1） [120 kVp的管电压/0.9的节距/过滤的反投影（FBP）重建]，然后进行高音调的非增强CT扫描（协议2）（100 kVp / 3.0 / SAFIRE）。比较了两种方案之间的总扫描时间，平均CT数，信噪比（SNR），图像质量，病变可检测性和辐射剂量。 结果方案2的总扫描时间明显短于方案1（1.4±0.1秒和7.6±0.6秒，P <0.001）。方案1和方案2在所有器官的平均CT数上没有显着差异（肝脏55.4±6.3 HU对56.1±6.8 HU，P = 0.214;胰腺43.6±5.9 HU对43.7±5.8 HU，P = 0.785;脾脏：47.9±3.9 HU vs.49.4±4.3 HU，P = 0.128;肾脏：32.2±2.3 HU vs.33.1±2.3 HU，P = 0.367;腹主动脉，44.8±5.6 HU vs.45.0±5.5 HU ，P ＝ 0.499;腰肌，50.7±4.1HU，而50.3±4.5HU，P ＝ 0.279。协议2的图像上的SNR高于协议1（肝脏，5.0±1.2 vs.4.5±1.1，P <0.001;胰腺，4.0±1.0 vs. 3.6±0.8，P <0.001;脾脏，4.7±1.0 vs. 。4.1±0.9，P <0.001;肾脏，3.1±0.6 vs. 2.8±0.6，P <0.001;腹主动脉，4.1±1.0 vs. 3.8±1.0，P <0.001;腹肌，4.5±1.1 vs. 4.3± 1.2，P ＝ 0.012）。方案2的整体图像噪声低于方案1（9.8±3.1 HU对11.1±3.0 HU，P <0.001）。方案2的图像质量良好，但低于方案1（4.1±0.7对4.6±0.5，P <0.001）。方案2感知了在方案1中在腹部和骨盆中发现的234个病变中的229个（97.9％）。方案2的辐射剂量低于方案1（4.4±0.4 mSv与7.3±2.4 mSv，P <0.001），平均剂量降低为41.4％。 结论具有SAFIRE的高音高DSCT可以缩短扫描时间并减少辐射剂量，同时在不增强腹部和骨盆的情况下保持图像质量。
展开▼
Department of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences&Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China;
