AJR Join ARRS
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Luker, G. D.
Right arrow Articles by Herman, T. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Luker, G. D.
Right arrow Articles by Herman, T. E.
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 167, 1189-1193, Copyright © 1996 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

Ghosting of pulmonary nodules with respiratory motion: comparison of helical and conventional CT using an in vitro pediatric model

GD Luker, KT Bae, MJ Siegel, S Don, JA Brink, G Wang and TE Herman
Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.

OBJECTIVE: The study was designed to compare helical CT with varying pitch and reconstruction intervals and conventional CT for revealing pulmonary nodules in a model that simulates respiratory motion in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT scans were obtained in an experimental model with one nodule (3 or 10 mm) in each scan. One- second scans were obtained at rates of 10, 20, and 30 respirations per minute using conventional CT with 4-mm collimation and table incrementation and helical CT with 4-mm collimation and either 4-mm/sec (pitch, 1:1) or 8-mm/sec (pitch, 2:1) table speed. Reconstructions were at 1-, 2-, and 4-mm intervals for scans obtained using 4-mm/sec table speed and at 1- and 4-mm intervals for scans obtained using 8-mm/sec table speed. Images were independently reviewed by three radiologists who estimated the number of nodules on each image. RESULTS: Ghosting (depiction of more than one nodule in a study) was seen in 79%, 80%, and 75% of helical CT scans obtained with a 1:1 pitch using 1-, 2-, and 4-mm reconstruction intervals, respectively. By comparison, ghosting was seen in only 54% and 58% of helical CT scans with a 2:1 pitch using 1-mm reconstruction intervals and 4-mm reconstruction intervals, respectively, and in 56% of conventional CT scans (p < .0001). A single nodule was detected on all other scans, and at least one nodule was seen on all scans. CONCLUSION: Ghosting of nodules is common in this model. Ghosting was seen less often on conventional scans and helical scans with 2:1 pitch than it was on helical scans with 1:1 pitch. Nonetheless, ghosting was seen on more than 50% of all scans with each technique.
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?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.