AJR InPractice
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
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Bonaldi, V. M.
Right arrow Articles by Reinhold, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bonaldi, V. M.
Right arrow Articles by Reinhold, C.
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?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 170, 373-376, Copyright © 1998 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

Helical CT of the pancreas: a comparison of cine display and film-based viewing

VM Bonaldi, PM Bret, M Atri and C Reinhold
Department of Radiology, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Quebec, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Radiologists must manage a tremendous number of helical CT images daily. Hence, the use of cine display review is increasing. Our aim was to compare cine display of helical CT examinations of the pancreas with conventional film-based viewing. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-eight consecutive patients undergoing helical CT of the pancreas were prospectively included in the study. Five-millimeter-thick contrast-enhanced helical CT sections of the pancreas were reconstructed in 1-mm increments for cine display review and in 5-mm- thick increments for film-based review. Two radiologists reviewed the two sets of data independently. Review of the cine display images was followed by review of the film-based images 2 months later. For both the cine display and the film-based images, reviewers used a four-point scale to grade vascular anatomy (splenic vein and artery, superior mesenteric vein and artery, portal confluence, dorsal pancreatic artery, and gastroduodenal artery); ductal anatomy (common bile duct in its hilar, suprapancreatic, and intrapancreatic portions and pancreatic duct in its caudal, corporeal, and cephalic portions); sharpness of the pancreatic and lesion contours; and overall image quality. RESULTS: The conspicuity of pancreatic contours was graded better on cine display (p = .0035). All venous and arterial landmarks were graded significantly better on cine display. Likewise, visibility of the common bile ducts and pancreatic ducts was scored significantly better with cine display. In three patients, cine display images revealed the pancreatic duct, and the film-based images did not. Although 21 lesions were shown on both sets of images, the lesions were better seen on cine display (p < .005). CONCLUSION: Vascular and ductal anatomy is better delineated on cine images generated from overlapped sections than on conventional film-based images. Lesions are also more sharply delineated on cine display images.
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
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. H. Kim, J. M. Lee, Y. J. Kim, J. Y. Choi, G. H. Kim, H. Y. Lee, and B. I. Choi
Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma on CT in Liver Transplant Candidates: Comparison of PACS Tile and Multisynchronized Stack Modes
Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2007; 188(5): 1337 - 1342.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
C. D. Johnson
Hard- versus Soft-Copy Interpretation
Radiology, June 1, 2003; 227(3): 629 - 630.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
M. E. J. Pijl, M. N. J. M. Wasser, E. C. Joekes, C. J. H. van de Velde, and J. L. Bloem
Metastases of Colorectal Carcinoma: Comparison of Soft- and Hard-Copy Helical CT Interpretation
Radiology, June 1, 2003; 227(3): 747 - 751.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
W. Schima, R. Fugger, E. Schober, C. Oettl, P. Wamser, F. Grabenwoger, J. M. Ryan, and G. Novacek
Diagnosis and Staging of Pancreatic Cancer: Comparison of Mangafodipir Trisodium--Enhanced MR Imaging and Contrast-Enhanced Helical Hydro-CT
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2002; 179(3): 717 - 724.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
E. K. Fishman
From the RSNA Refresher Courses: CT Angiography: Clinical Applications in the Abdomen
RadioGraphics, October 1, 2001; 21(90001): S3 - 16.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.