HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Vrtiska, T. J. Articles by McCollough, C. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Vrtiska, T. J. Articles by McCollough, C. H. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Spatial Resolution and Radiation Dose of a 64-MDCT Scanner Compared with Published CT Urography Protocols

¹ All authors: Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St., SW, Rochester, MN 55905.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to compare the spatial resolution and effective dose from 64-MDCT with several published CT urography protocols.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. A phantom containing 1-, 2-, or 4-mm cylindric channels to simulate ureters with 0.25- to 3-mm plugs to simulate ureteral filling defects or ureteral diverticula was imaged using eight helical CT urography protocols. Computed radiography (CR) was also performed. Coronal maximum-intensity-projection images were created and, with the CR image, were evaluated independently by two genitourinary radiologists. Spatial resolution was evaluated by scoring each abnormality as present, visible; or as absent, not visible. Effective dose estimates for 11 CT urography protocols, including the radiographs obtained in the CT urography protocol, were calculated using published Monte Carlo organ dose coefficients.

RESULTS. All ureteral abnormalities detected on CR were detected on the highest-spatial-resolution reconstruction using the evaluated 64-MDCT system. The smallest filling defect identified by both was 0.25 mm. Three 0.25-mm filling defects were not detected using the evaluated 16-MDCT system. The 4-MDCT system protocols showed the poorest performance. The range of effective doses for the evaluated CT urography protocols was 20.1–66.3 mSv. The number of phases, anatomic coverage per phase, and scanning parameters all contributed to this variation in dose.

CONCLUSION. The evaluated 64-MDCT system showed detection accuracy identical to that of CR. Limiting anatomic coverage for specific phases and combining phases can reduce dose for multiphase protocols by up to a factor of 2 relative to early (circa 2000) 4-MDCT.

Keywords: adults • CT • effective dose • radiation dose • technology assessment • ureter • urinary CT

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?