| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 All authors: Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Founders 216, 55 Fruit St., Boston, MA 02114.
OBJECTIVE. CT accounts for considerable population-based radiation dose from radiographic diagnostic studies. The technical factors for CT examinations are not appropriately adjusted on the basis of patient size and anatomy. We hypothesized that radiation doses for routine chest CT can be reduced by 50% for the evaluation of normal structures without seriously jeopardizing image quality.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS. After receiving institutional review board approval, we prospectively studied 24 patients with cancer who were 65 years old and older on a multidetector CT scanner. Each patient underwent imaging with four slices (centered at the carina) at the standard dose (220-280 mAs) and at 50%—reduced dose (110-140 mAs) at a constant 140 kVp. Single breath-hold scanning was performed with a 2.5-mm detector configuration, a tube rotation time of 0.8 sec, and a pitch of 6:1. Contiguous images were reconstructed at 5-mm intervals. Two subspecialty-trained chest radiologists who were unaware of the CT technique reviewed randomized images for overall image quality and anatomic detail of the structures in the lung, airway, mediastinum, and chest wall using a 5-point scale (1, worst; 2, suboptimal; 3, adequate; 4, very good; 5, excellent). The data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon's signed rank test.
RESULTS. Although overall image quality was better with standard-dose CT, the quality of reduced-dose CT was acceptable. The differences in mean scores were statistically significant. There was a correlation of 0.59 between observers. The mean scores of standard-dose CT were always greater than or equivalent to those of low-dose CT for both observers. The assessment of great vessels and soft tissue of the chest wall contributed mainly to the differences in image quality. Both the central and peripheral lung parenchyma and the airway were adequately visualized on low-dose CT. Radiation doses (based on weighted-CT—dose index) from standard-dose CT and 50%—reduced-dose CT were 15.6-21.4 mSv and 7.8-10.7 mSv, respectively (from the manufacturer's data).
CONCLUSION. Chest CT image quality appears to be acceptable for evaluating normal anatomic structures even with a 50% reduction in radiation dose.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. Kubo, P.-J. P. Lin, W. Stiller, M. Takahashi, H.-U. Kauczor, Y. Ohno, and H. Hatabu Radiation Dose Reduction in Chest CT: A Review Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2008; 190(2): 335 - 343. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Madani, V. De Maertelaer, J. Zanen, and P. A. Gevenois Pulmonary Emphysema: Radiation Dose and Section Thickness at Multidetector CT Quantification--Comparison with Macroscopic and Microscopic Morphometry Radiology, April 1, 2007; 243(1): 250 - 257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. A. Bankier, C. Schaefer-Prokop, V. De Maertelaer, D. Tack, P. Jaksch, W. Klepetko, and P. A. Gevenois Air Trapping: Comparison of Standard-Dose and Simulated Low-Dose Thin-Section CT Techniques Radiology, March 1, 2007; 242(3): 898 - 906. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Nakayama, K. Awai, Y. Funama, D. Liu, T. Nakaura, Y. Tamura, and Y. Yamashita Lower tube voltage reduces contrast material and radiation doses on 16-MDCT aortography. Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2006; 187(5): W490 - W497. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. I. Ha, H. W. Goo, J. B. Seo, J.-W. Song, and J. S. Lee Effects of high-resolution CT of the lung using partial versus full reconstruction on motion artifacts and image noise. Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2006; 187(3): 618 - 622. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. K. Kalra, S. Rizzo, M. M. Maher, E. F. Halpern, T. L. Toth, J.-A. O. Shepard, and S. L. Aquino Chest CT Performed with Z-Axis Modulation: Scanning Protocol and Radiation Dose Radiology, October 1, 2005; 237(1): 303 - 308. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Irie and H. Inoue Individual Modulation of the Tube Current-Seconds to Achieve Similar Levels of Image Noise in Contrast-Enhanced Abdominal CT Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2005; 184(5): 1514 - 1518. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Kosucu, A. Ahmetoglu, I. Koramaz, F. Orhan, O. Ozdemir, H. Dinc, A. Okten, and H. R. Gumele Low-Dose MDCT and Virtual Bronchoscopy in Pediatric Patients with Foreign Body Aspiration Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2004; 183(6): 1771 - 1777. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Remy-Jardin, A. Sobaszek, A. Duhamel, I. Mastora, C. Zanetti, and J. Remy Asbestos-related Pleuropulmonary Diseases: Evaluation with Low-Dose Four-Detector Row Spiral CT Radiology, October 1, 2004; 233(1): 182 - 190. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
X. Zhu, J. Yu, and Z. Huang Low-Dose Chest CT: Optimizing Radiation Protection for Patients Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2004; 183(3): 809 - 816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. B. Ertl-Wagner, R.-T. Hoffmann, R. Bruning, K. Herrmann, B. Snyder, J. D. Blume, and M. F. Reiser Multi-Detector Row CT Angiography of the Brain at Various Kilovoltage Settings Radiology, May 1, 2004; 231(2): 528 - 535. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. B. Sigal-Cinqualbre, R. Hennequin, H. T. Abada, X. Chen, and J.-F. Paul Low-Kilovoltage Multi-Detector Row Chest CT in Adults: Feasibility and Effect on Image Quality and Iodine Dose Radiology, April 1, 2004; 231(1): 169 - 174. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. K. Kalra, M. M. Maher, T. L. Toth, L. M. Hamberg, M. A. Blake, J.-A. Shepard, and S. Saini Strategies for CT Radiation Dose Optimization Radiology, March 1, 2004; 230(3): 619 - 628. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. S. Katz, N. Venkataramanan, S. Napel, and F. G. Sommer Can Low-Dose Unenhanced Multidetector CT Be Used for Routine Evaluation of Suspected Renal Colic? Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2003; 180(2): 313 - 315. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Berlin Potential Legal Ramifications of Whole-Body CT Screening: Taking a Peek into Pandora's Box Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2003; 180(2): 317 - 322. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. J. Siegel 2001 Plenary Session: Friday Imaging Symposium: CT Screening for Cancer RadioGraphics, November 1, 2002; 22(6): 1521 - 1523. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. F. Rogers Dose Reduction in CT: How Low Can We Go? Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2002; 179(2): 299 - 299. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
