-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Comparison of radiation dose and image quality for abdominal CT exams using photon-counting and energy-integrating CT: A self-controlled study including optimized patient positioning
L. Sukupova
Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, srovnávací studie
- MeSH
- dávka záření * MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- fotony MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- počítačová rentgenová tomografie * metody MeSH
- polohování pacienta * metody MeSH
- poměr signál - šum MeSH
- rentgendiagnostika břicha * metody MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- srovnávací studie MeSH
INTRODUCTION: Photon-counting detector (PCD) CT represents a major advancement in CT imaging, offering improved image quality and reduced radiation dose compared to traditional energy-integrating detector (EID) CT. This study compared image quality and radiation dose using a self-controlled approach, while evaluating the impact of patient positioning. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed data from 200 patients who underwent abdominal CT scans on both EID (Somatom Definition Flash) and PCD (Naeotom Alpha) scanners. After applying inclusion criteria for proper positioning (within ±20 mm) and stable anatomical conditions, 119 patients were included. Radiation doses were assessed using CTDIvol, and image quality was evaluated via CT numbers, noise levels, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), SNR to dose (SNRD), and contrast-to-noise ratio to dose (CNRD). RESULTS: The study found a median radiation dose reduction of 37 % with PCD CT compared to EID CT (p < 0.05). Image quality assessments revealed significant improvements with PCD CT, including reduced noise levels (up to 31 % in contrast-enhanced organs) and enhanced SNRD (33-51 % increase). CNRD improved by 60-76 %, indicating superior imaging performance of PCD CT. However, 36 % of patients on EID were positioned outside the ±20 mm range, which could adversely affect image quality and radiation dose, underscoring the need for more precise patient positioning. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that PCD CT achieves substantial reductions in radiation dose while enhancing image quality. However, accurate patient positioning is crucial to fully optimize these benefits. Automated tools that ensure proper positioning may be necessary to consistently maintain image quality and reduce radiation exposure. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: PCD CT offers improved patient safety and diagnostic imaging. Automated positioning tools are essential to optimize and consistently maintain image quality and minimize radiation exposure.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc25015919
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20250731091346.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 250708s2025 ne f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.radi.2025.102909 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)40086170
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a ne
- 100 1_
- $a Sukupova, L $u Division of the Director, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Videnska 1958/9, 140 21, Prague, Czech Republic. Electronic address: Lucie.sukupova@ikem.cz
- 245 10
- $a Comparison of radiation dose and image quality for abdominal CT exams using photon-counting and energy-integrating CT: A self-controlled study including optimized patient positioning / $c L. Sukupova
- 520 9_
- $a INTRODUCTION: Photon-counting detector (PCD) CT represents a major advancement in CT imaging, offering improved image quality and reduced radiation dose compared to traditional energy-integrating detector (EID) CT. This study compared image quality and radiation dose using a self-controlled approach, while evaluating the impact of patient positioning. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed data from 200 patients who underwent abdominal CT scans on both EID (Somatom Definition Flash) and PCD (Naeotom Alpha) scanners. After applying inclusion criteria for proper positioning (within ±20 mm) and stable anatomical conditions, 119 patients were included. Radiation doses were assessed using CTDIvol, and image quality was evaluated via CT numbers, noise levels, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), SNR to dose (SNRD), and contrast-to-noise ratio to dose (CNRD). RESULTS: The study found a median radiation dose reduction of 37 % with PCD CT compared to EID CT (p < 0.05). Image quality assessments revealed significant improvements with PCD CT, including reduced noise levels (up to 31 % in contrast-enhanced organs) and enhanced SNRD (33-51 % increase). CNRD improved by 60-76 %, indicating superior imaging performance of PCD CT. However, 36 % of patients on EID were positioned outside the ±20 mm range, which could adversely affect image quality and radiation dose, underscoring the need for more precise patient positioning. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that PCD CT achieves substantial reductions in radiation dose while enhancing image quality. However, accurate patient positioning is crucial to fully optimize these benefits. Automated tools that ensure proper positioning may be necessary to consistently maintain image quality and reduce radiation exposure. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: PCD CT offers improved patient safety and diagnostic imaging. Automated positioning tools are essential to optimize and consistently maintain image quality and minimize radiation exposure.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a polohování pacienta $x metody $7 D056888
- 650 12
- $a dávka záření $7 D011829
- 650 12
- $a počítačová rentgenová tomografie $x metody $7 D014057
- 650 _2
- $a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 12
- $a rentgendiagnostika břicha $x metody $7 D011860
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a poměr signál - šum $7 D059629
- 650 _2
- $a fotony $7 D017785
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a senioři nad 80 let $7 D000369
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
- 773 0_
- $w MED00167436 $t Radiography $x 1532-2831 $g Roč. 31, č. 3 (2025), s. 102909
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40086170 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20250708 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20250731091340 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2366632 $s 1253044
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2025 $b 31 $c 3 $d 102909 $e 20250313 $i 1532-2831 $m Radiography $n Radiography (Lond) $x MED00167436
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20250708