Evgenia Konstantinou , Antonios Ε. Papadakis , Maria Daskalogiannaki , Apostolos Karantanas , John Damilakis
{"title":"A methodological approach for the comparison of CT systems in terms of radiation dose and image quality","authors":"Evgenia Konstantinou , Antonios Ε. Papadakis , Maria Daskalogiannaki , Apostolos Karantanas , John Damilakis","doi":"10.1016/j.ejmp.2025.105092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study aims to apply a comparative methodology for two different computed tomography (CT) scanners, by evaluating patient radiation dose and image quality.</div></div><div><h3>Materials & methods</h3><div>A total of 189 consecutive non-enhanced and enhanced abdominal examinations, were performed using General Electric Revolution GSI (scanner A) and Siemens Somatom Drive (scanner B) scanners. Both protocols had been previously optimized by the same team for the two scanners, ensuring consistent image quality during comparison. CT dose index volume (CTDI<sub>vol</sub>) and dose-length product (DLP) were recorded, and percent dose difference between scanners was estimated. Image quality was objectively assessed using image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and subjectively with a five-point scale. Utilizing the same protocols, an anthropomorphic phantom was irradiated to estimate organ doses. Statistical analysis was conducted to compare the examined parameters.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The CTDI<sub>vol</sub> and DLP for two scanners were 16.4–21.8 mGy and 494.7–1030.3 mGy*cm, respectively. Doses for scanner B were up to 41 % lower than scanner A. No significant CTDI<sub>vol</sub> and DLP differences were found for unenhanced scans. Organ doses ranged from 5.0 to 16.9 mGy for both scanners, with scanner B delivering lower doses. Image quality was comparable between two CT systems. No statistical differences were found for image quality parameters, except for CNR in non-enhanced examinations. Radiologists’ ratings were consistent with the objective assessment.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>A methodology was applied to compare two different CT scanners, regardless of patient selection criteria. Scanner B achieved lower doses for contrast-enhanced exams than scanner A.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56092,"journal":{"name":"Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics","volume":"137 ","pages":"Article 105092"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1120179725002029","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to apply a comparative methodology for two different computed tomography (CT) scanners, by evaluating patient radiation dose and image quality.
Materials & methods
A total of 189 consecutive non-enhanced and enhanced abdominal examinations, were performed using General Electric Revolution GSI (scanner A) and Siemens Somatom Drive (scanner B) scanners. Both protocols had been previously optimized by the same team for the two scanners, ensuring consistent image quality during comparison. CT dose index volume (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) were recorded, and percent dose difference between scanners was estimated. Image quality was objectively assessed using image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and subjectively with a five-point scale. Utilizing the same protocols, an anthropomorphic phantom was irradiated to estimate organ doses. Statistical analysis was conducted to compare the examined parameters.
Results
The CTDIvol and DLP for two scanners were 16.4–21.8 mGy and 494.7–1030.3 mGy*cm, respectively. Doses for scanner B were up to 41 % lower than scanner A. No significant CTDIvol and DLP differences were found for unenhanced scans. Organ doses ranged from 5.0 to 16.9 mGy for both scanners, with scanner B delivering lower doses. Image quality was comparable between two CT systems. No statistical differences were found for image quality parameters, except for CNR in non-enhanced examinations. Radiologists’ ratings were consistent with the objective assessment.
Conclusion
A methodology was applied to compare two different CT scanners, regardless of patient selection criteria. Scanner B achieved lower doses for contrast-enhanced exams than scanner A.
期刊介绍:
Physica Medica, European Journal of Medical Physics, publishing with Elsevier from 2007, provides an international forum for research and reviews on the following main topics:
Medical Imaging
Radiation Therapy
Radiation Protection
Measuring Systems and Signal Processing
Education and training in Medical Physics
Professional issues in Medical Physics.