临床常规方案中三种不同CT扫描仪辐射剂量和图像质量的评价。

IF 2.7 Q3 IMAGING SCIENCE & PHOTOGRAPHIC TECHNOLOGY
Thawatchai Prabsattroo, Jiranthanin Phaorod, Piyaphat Tathuwan, Khanitta Tongluan, Puengjai Punikhom, Tongjit Maharantawong, Waraporn Sudchai
{"title":"临床常规方案中三种不同CT扫描仪辐射剂量和图像质量的评价。","authors":"Thawatchai Prabsattroo, Jiranthanin Phaorod, Piyaphat Tathuwan, Khanitta Tongluan, Puengjai Punikhom, Tongjit Maharantawong, Waraporn Sudchai","doi":"10.3390/jimaging11030070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Computed tomography examination plays a vital role in imaging and its use has rapidly increased in radiology diagnosis. This study aimed to assess radiation doses of routine CT protocols of the brain, chest, and abdomen in three different CT scanners, together with a qualitative image quality assessment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and Radimetrics software version 3.4.2 retrospectively collected patients' radiation doses. Radiation doses were recorded as the CTDI<sub>vol</sub>, dose length product, and effective dose. CT images were acquired using the Catphan700 phantom to evaluate image quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings revealed that median values for the CTDI<sub>vol</sub> and DLP across the brain, chest, and abdomen protocols were lower than the national and international DRLs. Effective doses for brain, chest, and abdomen protocols were also below the median value of R. Smith-Bindman. Neusoft achieved higher spatial frequencies in brain protocols, while Siemens outperformed others in chest protocols. Neusoft consistently exhibited superior high-contrast resolution. Siemens and Neusoft outperformed low-contrast detectability, while Siemens also outperformed the contrast-to-noise ratio. In addition, Siemens had the lowest image noise in brain protocols and high uniformity in chest and abdomen protocols. Neusoft showed the lowest noise in chest and abdomen protocols and high uniformity in the brain protocol. The noise power spectrum revealed that Philips had the highest noise magnitude with different noise textures across protocols and scanners.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of radiation doses and image quality for three different CT scanners using standard clinical protocols. Almost all CT protocols exhibited radiation doses below the DRLs and demonstrated varying image qualities across each protocol and scanner. Selecting the right CT scanner for each protocol is essential to ensure that the CT images exhibit the best quality among a wide range of CT machines. The MTF, HCR, LCD, CNR, NPS, noise, and uniformity are suitable parameters for evaluating and monitoring image quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":37035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Imaging","volume":"11 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11942822/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Clinical Routine Protocols from Three Different CT Scanners.\",\"authors\":\"Thawatchai Prabsattroo, Jiranthanin Phaorod, Piyaphat Tathuwan, Khanitta Tongluan, Puengjai Punikhom, Tongjit Maharantawong, Waraporn Sudchai\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/jimaging11030070\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Computed tomography examination plays a vital role in imaging and its use has rapidly increased in radiology diagnosis. This study aimed to assess radiation doses of routine CT protocols of the brain, chest, and abdomen in three different CT scanners, together with a qualitative image quality assessment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and Radimetrics software version 3.4.2 retrospectively collected patients' radiation doses. Radiation doses were recorded as the CTDI<sub>vol</sub>, dose length product, and effective dose. CT images were acquired using the Catphan700 phantom to evaluate image quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings revealed that median values for the CTDI<sub>vol</sub> and DLP across the brain, chest, and abdomen protocols were lower than the national and international DRLs. Effective doses for brain, chest, and abdomen protocols were also below the median value of R. Smith-Bindman. Neusoft achieved higher spatial frequencies in brain protocols, while Siemens outperformed others in chest protocols. Neusoft consistently exhibited superior high-contrast resolution. Siemens and Neusoft outperformed low-contrast detectability, while Siemens also outperformed the contrast-to-noise ratio. In addition, Siemens had the lowest image noise in brain protocols and high uniformity in chest and abdomen protocols. Neusoft showed the lowest noise in chest and abdomen protocols and high uniformity in the brain protocol. The noise power spectrum revealed that Philips had the highest noise magnitude with different noise textures across protocols and scanners.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of radiation doses and image quality for three different CT scanners using standard clinical protocols. Almost all CT protocols exhibited radiation doses below the DRLs and demonstrated varying image qualities across each protocol and scanner. Selecting the right CT scanner for each protocol is essential to ensure that the CT images exhibit the best quality among a wide range of CT machines. The MTF, HCR, LCD, CNR, NPS, noise, and uniformity are suitable parameters for evaluating and monitoring image quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Imaging\",\"volume\":\"11 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11942822/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging11030070\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"IMAGING SCIENCE & PHOTOGRAPHIC TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging11030070","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"IMAGING SCIENCE & PHOTOGRAPHIC TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

计算机断层扫描检查在影像学中起着至关重要的作用,其在放射学诊断中的应用迅速增加。本研究旨在评估三种不同CT扫描仪对脑、胸、腹部常规CT方案的辐射剂量,并对图像质量进行定性评估。方法:采用图片存档和通讯系统(PACS)和Radimetrics 3.4.2版本软件回顾性收集患者的辐射剂量。辐射剂量记录为CTDIvol、剂量长度积和有效剂量。使用Catphan700幻影仪获取CT图像,评价图像质量。结果:研究结果显示,CTDIvol和DLP横跨脑、胸、腹协议的中位数值低于国内和国际drl。脑、胸部和腹部治疗方案的有效剂量也低于R. Smith-Bindman的中值。东软在脑协议中实现了更高的空间频率,而西门子在胸部协议中优于其他公司。东软一贯表现出卓越的高对比度分辨率。西门子和东软在低对比度检测方面表现出色,而西门子的对比噪声比也表现出色。此外,西门子在脑部方案中具有最低的图像噪声,在胸腹方案中具有较高的均匀性。东软在胸部和腹部方案中表现出最低的噪声,在脑部方案中表现出高度的均匀性。噪声功率谱显示,飞利浦在不同协议和扫描仪的不同噪声纹理下具有最高的噪声量级。结论:本研究采用标准临床方案对三种不同CT扫描仪的辐射剂量和图像质量进行了综合评估。几乎所有的CT方案都显示出低于drl的辐射剂量,并且在每种方案和扫描仪上显示出不同的图像质量。为每个方案选择合适的CT扫描仪对于确保CT图像在广泛的CT机器中显示最佳质量至关重要。MTF、HCR、LCD、CNR、NPS、噪声和均匀性是评估和监控图像质量的合适参数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Clinical Routine Protocols from Three Different CT Scanners.

Computed tomography examination plays a vital role in imaging and its use has rapidly increased in radiology diagnosis. This study aimed to assess radiation doses of routine CT protocols of the brain, chest, and abdomen in three different CT scanners, together with a qualitative image quality assessment.

Methods: A picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and Radimetrics software version 3.4.2 retrospectively collected patients' radiation doses. Radiation doses were recorded as the CTDIvol, dose length product, and effective dose. CT images were acquired using the Catphan700 phantom to evaluate image quality.

Results: The findings revealed that median values for the CTDIvol and DLP across the brain, chest, and abdomen protocols were lower than the national and international DRLs. Effective doses for brain, chest, and abdomen protocols were also below the median value of R. Smith-Bindman. Neusoft achieved higher spatial frequencies in brain protocols, while Siemens outperformed others in chest protocols. Neusoft consistently exhibited superior high-contrast resolution. Siemens and Neusoft outperformed low-contrast detectability, while Siemens also outperformed the contrast-to-noise ratio. In addition, Siemens had the lowest image noise in brain protocols and high uniformity in chest and abdomen protocols. Neusoft showed the lowest noise in chest and abdomen protocols and high uniformity in the brain protocol. The noise power spectrum revealed that Philips had the highest noise magnitude with different noise textures across protocols and scanners.

Conclusions: This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of radiation doses and image quality for three different CT scanners using standard clinical protocols. Almost all CT protocols exhibited radiation doses below the DRLs and demonstrated varying image qualities across each protocol and scanner. Selecting the right CT scanner for each protocol is essential to ensure that the CT images exhibit the best quality among a wide range of CT machines. The MTF, HCR, LCD, CNR, NPS, noise, and uniformity are suitable parameters for evaluating and monitoring image quality.

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
Journal of Imaging
Journal of Imaging Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
303
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
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