TY - JOUR
T1 - Lung Image Quality with 320-row Wide-volume CT Scans
T2 - The Effect of Prospective ECG-gating and Comparisons with 64-row Helical CT Scans
AU - Yamashiro, Tsuneo
AU - Miyara, Tetsuhiro
AU - Takahashi, Masashi
AU - Kikuyama, Ayano
AU - Kamiya, Hisashi
AU - Koyama, Hisanobu
AU - Ohno, Yoshiharu
AU - Moriya, Hiroshi
AU - Matsuki, Mitsuru
AU - Tanaka, Yuko
AU - Noma, Satoshi
AU - Murayama, Sadayuki
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy and supported by NIH grant RR06555 (ASP), Sullivan Fellowship (AUN),
Funding Information:
Fogarty International Research Fellowship NIH-F05-TW04809 (AUN) and the Los Alamos Center for Nonlinear Studies (RWA). We thank Rob J. De Boer and Mark A. Taylor for many useful discussions and criticisms.
PY - 2012/4
Y1 - 2012/4
N2 - Rationales and Objectives: To evaluate the image quality of 320-row wide-volume (WV) computed tomography (CT) scans in comparison with 64-row helical scans for the lung. Materials and Methods: The Institutional Review Board of each institution approved this prospective, multicenter study and informed consent was obtained. A total of 73 subjects underwent two types of chest CT, including 320-row WV scans and 64-row helical scans. Both scans used the same tube voltage, tube current, exposure time setting, and slice thickness. The helical scans were not electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated. For the WV scans, prospective ECG-gating was used for 38 subjects, whereas the other 35 subjects did not have ECG-gating. Using a 5-point scale from 1 (nondiagnostic) to 5 (excellent), three blinded observers independently evaluated image quality for five lobes and the lingula. The differences in the scores between WV scans and helical scans were compared using Wilcoxon's signed-rank test. Results: The WV scans with ECG-gating had significantly higher scores than 64-row helical scans for all lobes and lingula (right lower lobe, P <01; other lobes and lingula, P < .0001, respectively). The 320-row WV scans without ECG-gating also had significantly higher scores than 64-row helical scans (P < .05), except for nonsignificant differences for the left upper lobe. Conclusions: Lung image quality of ECG-gated WV scans, which do not require any additional radiation exposure, is better than that of non-ECG-gated 64-row helical scans. Non-ECG-gated 320-row WV scans are comparable or slightly superior to non-ECG-gated 64-row helical scans.
AB - Rationales and Objectives: To evaluate the image quality of 320-row wide-volume (WV) computed tomography (CT) scans in comparison with 64-row helical scans for the lung. Materials and Methods: The Institutional Review Board of each institution approved this prospective, multicenter study and informed consent was obtained. A total of 73 subjects underwent two types of chest CT, including 320-row WV scans and 64-row helical scans. Both scans used the same tube voltage, tube current, exposure time setting, and slice thickness. The helical scans were not electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated. For the WV scans, prospective ECG-gating was used for 38 subjects, whereas the other 35 subjects did not have ECG-gating. Using a 5-point scale from 1 (nondiagnostic) to 5 (excellent), three blinded observers independently evaluated image quality for five lobes and the lingula. The differences in the scores between WV scans and helical scans were compared using Wilcoxon's signed-rank test. Results: The WV scans with ECG-gating had significantly higher scores than 64-row helical scans for all lobes and lingula (right lower lobe, P <01; other lobes and lingula, P < .0001, respectively). The 320-row WV scans without ECG-gating also had significantly higher scores than 64-row helical scans (P < .05), except for nonsignificant differences for the left upper lobe. Conclusions: Lung image quality of ECG-gated WV scans, which do not require any additional radiation exposure, is better than that of non-ECG-gated 64-row helical scans. Non-ECG-gated 320-row WV scans are comparable or slightly superior to non-ECG-gated 64-row helical scans.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84858798277&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84858798277&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.acra.2011.12.001
DO - 10.1016/j.acra.2011.12.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 22222025
AN - SCOPUS:84858798277
VL - 19
SP - 380
EP - 388
JO - Academic Radiology
JF - Academic Radiology
SN - 1076-6332
IS - 4
ER -