TY - JOUR
T1 - Capability of abdominal 320-detector row CT for small vasculature assessment compared with that of 64-detector row CT
AU - Kitajima, Kazuhiro
AU - Maeda, Tetsuo
AU - Ohno, Yoshiharu
AU - Yoshikawa, Takeshi
AU - Konishi, Minoru
AU - Kanda, Tomonori
AU - Onishi, Yumiko
AU - Matsumoto, Keiko
AU - Koyama, Hisanobu
AU - Takenaka, Daisuke
AU - Sugimura, Kazuro
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by Toshiba Medical Systems and Bayer Pharma.
PY - 2011/11
Y1 - 2011/11
N2 - Objective: To compare the capability of 320-detector row CT (area-detector CT: ADCT) with step-and-shoot scan protocol for small abdominal vasculature assessment with that of 64-detector row CT with helical scan protocol. Materials and methods: Total of 60 patients underwent contrast-enhanced abdominal CT for preoperative assessment. Of all, 30 suspected to have lung cancer underwent ADCT using step-and-shoot scan protocol. The other 30 suspected to have renal cell carcinoma underwent 64-MDCT using helical scan protocol. Two experienced radiologists independently assessed inferior epigastric, hepatic subsegmental (in the segment 8), mesenteric marginal (Griffith point) and inferior phrenic arteries by using 5-point visual scoring systems. Kappa analysis was used for evaluation of interobserver agreement. To compare the visualization capability of the two systems, the Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare the scores for each of the arteries. Results: Overall interobserver agreements for both systems were almost perfect (κ > 0.80). Visualization scores for inferior epigastric and mesenteric arteries were significantly higher for ADCT than for 64-detector row CT (p < 0.05). No significant difference was found for hepatic subsegmental and inferior phrenic arteries. Conclusion: Small abdominal vasculature assessment by ADCT with step-and-shoot scan protocol is potentially equal to or better than that by 64-detector row CT with helical scan protocol.
AB - Objective: To compare the capability of 320-detector row CT (area-detector CT: ADCT) with step-and-shoot scan protocol for small abdominal vasculature assessment with that of 64-detector row CT with helical scan protocol. Materials and methods: Total of 60 patients underwent contrast-enhanced abdominal CT for preoperative assessment. Of all, 30 suspected to have lung cancer underwent ADCT using step-and-shoot scan protocol. The other 30 suspected to have renal cell carcinoma underwent 64-MDCT using helical scan protocol. Two experienced radiologists independently assessed inferior epigastric, hepatic subsegmental (in the segment 8), mesenteric marginal (Griffith point) and inferior phrenic arteries by using 5-point visual scoring systems. Kappa analysis was used for evaluation of interobserver agreement. To compare the visualization capability of the two systems, the Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare the scores for each of the arteries. Results: Overall interobserver agreements for both systems were almost perfect (κ > 0.80). Visualization scores for inferior epigastric and mesenteric arteries were significantly higher for ADCT than for 64-detector row CT (p < 0.05). No significant difference was found for hepatic subsegmental and inferior phrenic arteries. Conclusion: Small abdominal vasculature assessment by ADCT with step-and-shoot scan protocol is potentially equal to or better than that by 64-detector row CT with helical scan protocol.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053653277&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053653277&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.05.014
DO - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.05.014
M3 - Article
C2 - 20579828
AN - SCOPUS:80053653277
SN - 0720-048X
VL - 80
SP - 219
EP - 223
JO - European journal of radiology
JF - European journal of radiology
IS - 2
ER -