AJR AJR-based Continuing Ed for Technologists
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Posniak, H. V.
Right arrow Articles by Kalbhen, C. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Posniak, H. V.
Right arrow Articles by Kalbhen, C. L.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 163, 1073-1077, Copyright © 1994 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

CT of the chest and abdomen in patients on mechanical pulmonary ventilators: quality of images made at 0.6 vs 1.0 sec

HV Posniak, MC Olson, TC Demos, KL Pierce and CL Kalbhen
Department of Radiology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL 60153.

OBJECTIVE. Chest and abdominal CT scans using 1.0-sec scan times are often limited by motion in patients who are unable to hold their breath. With our scanner we can obtain images in 0.6 sec (partial scan) that use data from 225 degrees instead of the 360 degrees used for 1.0- sec scans. The purpose of this study was to assess whether the quality of images of the chest and abdomen in patients on mechanical pulmonary ventilators who could not breath-hold could be improved if images were taken using a scan time of 0.6 sec rather than 1.0 sec. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty patients who were being treated with mechanical pulmonary ventilation with indications for chest or abdominal CT or both were scanned with a scan time of 1.0 sec. At the end of the examination, additional 0.6-sec images were taken at three or four levels. Images obtained with these two scan times were filmed at similar levels and windows, and anatomically matched levels were compared. The images were masked and independently evaluated by three radiologists for motion, noise, artifact, and overall image quality. Each parameter was rated using a scale of 1 to 4. Using Kendall's tau correlation, there was no significant difference between the radiologists in the grading of individual parameters or of overall image quality. Therefore, the average of the scores of the three radiologists was used. Statistical analysis was done using repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance. RESULTS. Images obtained in 0.6 sec had significantly less motion (p < .001) but more noise (p < .001) than those obtained in 1.0 sec. We found no statistically significant difference in artifacts between the two scan times. Overall image quality was judged to be significantly better on scans obtained in 0.6 sec than on scans obtained at 1.0 sec (p < .001), in spite of the greater noise on 0.6-sec images. The higher quality of 0.6-sec images was most noticeable for lung window settings. CONCLUSION. Our results indicate that scans taken in 0.6 sec (partial scans) provide better quality images than those obtained in 1.0 sec in patients being treated with mechanical pulmonary ventilation who cannot breath-hold. This technique may be useful not only in this population but in all patients who are unable to cooperate with breath-holding instructions.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
M. Arac, A. Y. Oner, H. Celik, S. Akpek, and S. Isik
Lung at Thin-Section CT: Influence of Multiple-Segment Reconstruction on Image Quality
Radiology, October 1, 2003; 229(1): 195 - 199.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. Lucaya, J. Piqueras, P. Garcia-Pena, G. Enriquez, M. Garcia-Macias, and J. Sotil
Low-Dose High-Resolution CT of the Chest in Children and Young Adults: Dose, Cooperation, Artifact Incidence, and Image Quality
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2000; 175(4): 985 - 992.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.