AJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Trotta, B. M.
Right arrow Articles by Altes, T. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Trotta, B. M.
Right arrow Articles by Altes, T. A.
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?

Characterization of the Relation Between CT Technical Parameters and Accuracy of Quantification of Lung Attenuation on Quantitative Chest CT

Brian M. Trotta1, Alexander V. Stolin1, Mark B. Williams1, Spencer B. Gay1, Alan S. Brody2 and Talissa A. Altes3

1 Department of Radiology, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, VA.
2 Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH.
3 Department of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 34th St. and Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA 19104.


Figure 1
View larger version (79K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1 Photograph shows urethane samples representing lung attenuation of –650 (left) and –820 H (right).

 

Figure 2
View larger version (128K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2A Anthropomorphic thoracic phantom. Photograph in anterior projection shows samples at apex (position 1) and base (position 2) of lungs.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (133K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2B Anthropomorphic thoracic phantom. Photograph shows posterior view of phantom.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3A Sample materials in three environments tested in phantom. Slice thickness is 0.625 mm and tube voltage, 120 kVp. Axial CT images acquired with high-dose (200 mA) technique outside phantom (A), at lung base (B), and at lung apex (C).

 

Figure 5
View larger version (71K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3B Sample materials in three environments tested in phantom. Slice thickness is 0.625 mm and tube voltage, 120 kVp. Axial CT images acquired with high-dose (200 mA) technique outside phantom (A), at lung base (B), and at lung apex (C).

 

Figure 6
View larger version (87K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3C Sample materials in three environments tested in phantom. Slice thickness is 0.625 mm and tube voltage, 120 kVp. Axial CT images acquired with high-dose (200 mA) technique outside phantom (A), at lung base (B), and at lung apex (C).

 

Figure 7
View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3D Sample materials in three environments tested in phantom. Slice thickness is 0.625 mm and tube voltage, 120 kVp. Axial CT images acquired with low-dose (30 mA) technique outside phantom (D), at lung base (E), and at lung apex (F). Degraded image quality is apparent in F.

 

Figure 8
View larger version (107K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3E Sample materials in three environments tested in phantom. Slice thickness is 0.625 mm and tube voltage, 120 kVp. Axial CT images acquired with low-dose (30 mA) technique outside phantom (D), at lung base (E), and at lung apex (F). Degraded image quality is apparent in F.

 

Figure 9
View larger version (122K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3F Sample materials in three environments tested in phantom. Slice thickness is 0.625 mm and tube voltage, 120 kVp. Axial CT images acquired with low-dose (30 mA) technique outside phantom (D), at lung base (E), and at lung apex (F). Degraded image quality is apparent in F.

 

Figure 10
View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4A Variation in mean attenuation in relation to tube current. Graph shows mean attenuation outside phantom. Error bars indicate SD, which is so small error bars are not evident. X, indicate 0 H; {blacksquare}, –650 H; {blacktriangleup}, –820 H; {diamondsuit}, –1,000 H.

 

Figure 11
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4B Variation in mean attenuation in relation to tube current. Graph shows mean ± SD (error bars) attenuation at base of lung within phantom. To improve visualization of changes within samples of lung attenuation materials, water sample is not included. {blacksquare} indicate –650 H; {blacktriangleup}, –820 H; {diamondsuit}, –1,000 H.

 

Figure 12
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4C Variation in mean attenuation in relation to tube current. Graph shows mean ± SD (error bars) attenuation at apex of lung inside phantom. {blacksquare} indicate –650 H; {blacktriangleup}, –820 H; {diamondsuit}, –1,000 H.

 

Figure 13
View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4D Variation in mean attenuation in relation to tube current. Graph shows SD of mean attenuation of healthy lung (–650 H) at three locations. Similar results were obtained with other samples. {blacksquare} indicate apex; {blacktriangleup}, base; {diamondsuit}, outside of phantom.

 

Figure 14
View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5A Mean attenuation in relation to tube current at 15th percentile of attenuation. {blacksquare} with solid line indicate mean attenuation of –650 H; {blacksquare} with dashed line, attenuation of –650 H at 15th percentile; {blacktriangleup} with solid line, mean attenuation of –820 H; {blacktriangleup} with dashed line, attenuation of –820 H at 15th percentile; {diamondsuit} with solid line, mean attenuation of –1,000 H; {diamondsuit} with dashed line, attenuation of –1,000 H at 15th percentile. Graph shows mean and 15th percentile of attenuation outside phantom.

 

Figure 15
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5A Mean attenuation in relation to tube current at 15th percentile of attenuation. {blacksquare} with solid line indicate mean attenuation of –650 H; {blacksquare} with dashed line, attenuation of –650 H at 15th percentile; {blacktriangleup} with solid line, mean attenuation of –820 H; {blacktriangleup} with dashed line, attenuation of –820 H at 15th percentile; {diamondsuit} with solid line, mean attenuation of –1,000 H; {diamondsuit} with dashed line, attenuation of –1,000 H at 15th percentile. Graph shows mean and 15th percentile of attenuation at base of lung. 15th percentile of attenuation changes more with decreasing tube current than with mean attenuation.

 

Figure 16
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5C Mean attenuation in relation to tube current at 15th percentile of attenuation. {blacksquare} with solid line indicate mean attenuation of –650 H; {blacksquare} with dashed line, attenuation of –650 H at 15th percentile; {blacktriangleup} with solid line, mean attenuation of –820 H; {blacktriangleup} with dashed line, attenuation of –820 H at 15th percentile; {diamondsuit} with solid line, mean attenuation of –1,000 H; {diamondsuit} with dashed line, attenuation of –1,000 H at 15th percentile. Graph shows mean and 15th percentile of attenuation at apex of lung. 15th percentile of attenuation changes more with decreasing tube current than with mean attenuation.

 

Figure 17
View larger version (7K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6A Percentage of pixels with attenuation less than –910 H in relation to tube current. {blacksquare} indicates –650 H; {blacktriangleup}, –820 H; {diamondsuit}, –1,000 H. Graph shows percentage of pixels with attenuation less than –910 H outside phantom for samples of normal lung (–650 H), borderline emphysematous lung (–820 H), and severely emphysematous lung (–1,000 H).

 

Figure 18
View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6B Percentage of pixels with attenuation less than –910 H in relation to tube current. {blacksquare} indicates –650 H; {blacktriangleup}, –820 H; {diamondsuit}, –1,000 H. Graph shows percentage of pixels with attenuation less than –910 H at base of lung for normal lung (–650 H) and borderline emphysematous lung (–820 H), which overlap, and severely emphysematous lung (–1,000 H).

 

Figure 19
View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6C Percentage of pixels with attenuation less than –910 H in relation to tube current. {blacksquare} indicates –650 H; {blacktriangleup}, –820 H; {diamondsuit}, –1,000 H. Graph shows percentage of pixels with attenuation less than –910 H at apex of lung for normal lung (–650 H), borderline emphysematous lung (–820 H) and severely emphysematous lung (–1,000 H) samples.

 

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 © 2007 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.