小儿腹盆腔光子计数 CT 与能量集成探测器 CT 的辐射剂量和图像质量比较。

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Marilyn J Siegel, Matthew Allan Thomas, Adeel Haq, Noah Seymore, Kushaljit Singh Sodhi, Andres Abadia
{"title":"小儿腹盆腔光子计数 CT 与能量集成探测器 CT 的辐射剂量和图像质量比较。","authors":"Marilyn J Siegel, Matthew Allan Thomas, Adeel Haq, Noah Seymore, Kushaljit Singh Sodhi, Andres Abadia","doi":"10.1097/RCT.0000000000001730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Adoption of abdominal photon counting detector CT (PCD-CT) into clinical pediatric CT practice requires evidence that it provides diagnostic images at acceptable radiation doses. Thus, this study aimed to compare radiation dose and image quality of PCD-CT and conventional energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) in pediatric abdominopelvic CT.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This institutional review board-approved retrospective study included 147 children (median age 8.5 y; 80 boys, 67 girls) who underwent clinically indicated contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic PCD-CT between October 1, 2022 and April 30, 2023 and 147 children (median age 8.5 y; 74 boys, 73 girls) who underwent EID-CT between July 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. Patients in the 2 groups were matched by age and effective diameter. Radiation dose parameters (CT dose index volume, CTDIvol; dose length product, DLP; size-specific dose estimate, SSDE) were recorded. In a subset of 25 matched pairs, subjective image quality was assessed on a scale of 1 to 4 (1=highest quality), and liver attenuation, dose-normalized noise, and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured. Groups were compared using parametric and/or nonparametric testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 147 matched pairs, there were no significant differences in sex (P=0.576), age (P=0.084), or diameter (P=0.668). PCD-CT showed significantly lower median CTDIvol, DLP, and SSDE (1.6 mGy, 63.8 mGy-cm, 3.1 mGy) compared with EID-CT (3.7 mGy, 155.3 mGy-cm, 6.0 mGy) (P<0.001). In the subset of 25 patients, PCD-CT and EID-CT showed no significant difference in overall image quality for reader 1 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.781) or reader 2 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.817), or artifacts for reader 1 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.688) or reader 2 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.219). After normalizing for radiation dose, image noise was significantly lower with PCD-CT (P<0.001), while CNR in the liver (P=0.244) and portal vein (P=0.079) were comparable to EID-CT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Abdominopelvic PCD-CT in children significantly reduces radiation dose while maintaining subjective image quality, and accounting for dose levels, has the potential to lower image noise and achieve comparable CNR to EID-CT. These data expand understanding of the capabilities of PCD-CT and support its routine use in children.</p>","PeriodicalId":15402,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Pediatric Abdominopelvic Photon-Counting Versus Energy-Integrating Detector CT.\",\"authors\":\"Marilyn J Siegel, Matthew Allan Thomas, Adeel Haq, Noah Seymore, Kushaljit Singh Sodhi, Andres Abadia\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/RCT.0000000000001730\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Adoption of abdominal photon counting detector CT (PCD-CT) into clinical pediatric CT practice requires evidence that it provides diagnostic images at acceptable radiation doses. Thus, this study aimed to compare radiation dose and image quality of PCD-CT and conventional energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) in pediatric abdominopelvic CT.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This institutional review board-approved retrospective study included 147 children (median age 8.5 y; 80 boys, 67 girls) who underwent clinically indicated contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic PCD-CT between October 1, 2022 and April 30, 2023 and 147 children (median age 8.5 y; 74 boys, 73 girls) who underwent EID-CT between July 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. Patients in the 2 groups were matched by age and effective diameter. Radiation dose parameters (CT dose index volume, CTDIvol; dose length product, DLP; size-specific dose estimate, SSDE) were recorded. In a subset of 25 matched pairs, subjective image quality was assessed on a scale of 1 to 4 (1=highest quality), and liver attenuation, dose-normalized noise, and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured. Groups were compared using parametric and/or nonparametric testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 147 matched pairs, there were no significant differences in sex (P=0.576), age (P=0.084), or diameter (P=0.668). PCD-CT showed significantly lower median CTDIvol, DLP, and SSDE (1.6 mGy, 63.8 mGy-cm, 3.1 mGy) compared with EID-CT (3.7 mGy, 155.3 mGy-cm, 6.0 mGy) (P<0.001). In the subset of 25 patients, PCD-CT and EID-CT showed no significant difference in overall image quality for reader 1 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.781) or reader 2 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.817), or artifacts for reader 1 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.688) or reader 2 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.219). After normalizing for radiation dose, image noise was significantly lower with PCD-CT (P<0.001), while CNR in the liver (P=0.244) and portal vein (P=0.079) were comparable to EID-CT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Abdominopelvic PCD-CT in children significantly reduces radiation dose while maintaining subjective image quality, and accounting for dose levels, has the potential to lower image noise and achieve comparable CNR to EID-CT. These data expand understanding of the capabilities of PCD-CT and support its routine use in children.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15402,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000001730\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000001730","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Pediatric Abdominopelvic Photon-Counting Versus Energy-Integrating Detector CT.

Objective: Adoption of abdominal photon counting detector CT (PCD-CT) into clinical pediatric CT practice requires evidence that it provides diagnostic images at acceptable radiation doses. Thus, this study aimed to compare radiation dose and image quality of PCD-CT and conventional energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) in pediatric abdominopelvic CT.

Materials and methods: This institutional review board-approved retrospective study included 147 children (median age 8.5 y; 80 boys, 67 girls) who underwent clinically indicated contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic PCD-CT between October 1, 2022 and April 30, 2023 and 147 children (median age 8.5 y; 74 boys, 73 girls) who underwent EID-CT between July 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. Patients in the 2 groups were matched by age and effective diameter. Radiation dose parameters (CT dose index volume, CTDIvol; dose length product, DLP; size-specific dose estimate, SSDE) were recorded. In a subset of 25 matched pairs, subjective image quality was assessed on a scale of 1 to 4 (1=highest quality), and liver attenuation, dose-normalized noise, and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured. Groups were compared using parametric and/or nonparametric testing.

Results: Among the 147 matched pairs, there were no significant differences in sex (P=0.576), age (P=0.084), or diameter (P=0.668). PCD-CT showed significantly lower median CTDIvol, DLP, and SSDE (1.6 mGy, 63.8 mGy-cm, 3.1 mGy) compared with EID-CT (3.7 mGy, 155.3 mGy-cm, 6.0 mGy) (P<0.001). In the subset of 25 patients, PCD-CT and EID-CT showed no significant difference in overall image quality for reader 1 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.781) or reader 2 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.817), or artifacts for reader 1 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.688) or reader 2 (1.0 vs. 1.0, P=0.219). After normalizing for radiation dose, image noise was significantly lower with PCD-CT (P<0.001), while CNR in the liver (P=0.244) and portal vein (P=0.079) were comparable to EID-CT.

Conclusion: Abdominopelvic PCD-CT in children significantly reduces radiation dose while maintaining subjective image quality, and accounting for dose levels, has the potential to lower image noise and achieve comparable CNR to EID-CT. These data expand understanding of the capabilities of PCD-CT and support its routine use in children.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
230
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The mission of Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography is to showcase the latest clinical and research developments in CT, MR, and closely related diagnostic techniques. We encourage submission of both original research and review articles that have immediate or promissory clinical applications. Topics of special interest include: 1) functional MR and CT of the brain and body; 2) advanced/innovative MRI techniques (diffusion, perfusion, rapid scanning); and 3) advanced/innovative CT techniques (perfusion, multi-energy, dose-reduction, and processing).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信