Comparative Study Between Mdct in Chest and Brain Ct Scan by Dose and Image Quality Parameters
Keywords:
Multi-detector CT scan, Radiation dose, Image quality, Contrast to Noise Ratio, Signal to Noise Ratio.Abstract
Background: Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) has become a routine imaging modality for numerous clinical applications due to its extensive availability, reduced invasiveness, rapid scanning time, great anatomical resolution, and superior diagnostic value. At the same time, the radiation dose to the patient and the concern surrounding this problem has also increased. Objective: The aim of this study is to assess image quality related to patient radiation dose for multidetector computed tomography in chest and brain CT examinations. Patients and Methods: A total of 60 patients who underwent chest and brain scans from four hospitals on 16, 32, and 64 slice (CT) scanners. Clinical image data were used for image quality calculation and dose assessment. The image quality is calculated by CNR & SNR. The CT dose volume index (CTDIv) and dose length product (DLP) were documented from the image display. Results: Regarding the radiographic parameters, the mean value of radiation doses (CTDIv, DLP and ED) to patients were higher from 64 slice scanner for the chest CT scan examination (12.6±0.21, 478.6±73.3 and 6.7±1.026) respectively. It was significantly lower in 32 and 16 slice multi detector CT (9.34±0.23, 341.86±11.56 and 4.78±0.164) (7.6±1.5, 247.9±52.6 and 3.46±0.738) respectively, the same parameters in brain CT scan examinations, the mean value of radiation doses (CTDIv, DLP and ED) to patients were higher from 64 slice scanner (79.75±1.69, 1598.8±110.8 and 3.35±0.23) respectively. It was significantly lower in 32 and 16 slice multi detector CT (69.54±4.74, 986.9±72.17 and 2.07±0.15) (54.21, 943.8±21.74, and 1.98±0.045) respectively. Regarding image quality assessment, the SNR and CNR are compared among multiple groups of patients examined in three types of MDCT. In regard to SNR, in our study it is noted that there are no significant differences among brain groups and chest groups according to the three multi-detector rows of 16-MDCT, 32-MDCT, and 64-MDCT. Where, the determined means of SNR and P-value ofbrain groups are (11.5±1.35, 1 1.75±4.13, 12.3±5.61, and 0.9) and for chest While, the determined means of SNR and P-value of chest groups are (3.83±0.76, 4.18±1.35, 5.92±3.1, and 0.05) respectively. Conclusion: The mean value of radiation doses (CTDIv in mGy, DLP in mGy.cm and ED in mSv) higher in 64 than 32 and less than that in 16 in chest and brain CT scan. While the image quality was higher in higher CT multi-detector rows, it is non-significant in chest and brain CT exam.
Downloads
References
Ibad, H.A., de Cesar Netto, C., Shakoor, D., Sisniega, A., Liu, S.Z.,
Siewerdsen, J.H., Carrino, J.A., Zbijewski, W. and Demehri, S., 2023.
Computed tomography: state-of-The-art advancements in
musculoskeletal imaging. Investigative radiology, 58(1), pp.99-110.
Khalid, H., Hussain, M., Al Ghamdi, M.A., Khalid, T., Khalid, K.,
Khan, M.A., Fatima, K., Masood, K., Almotiri, S.H., Farooq, M.S. and
Ahmed, A., 2020. A comparative systematic literature review on knee
bone reports from mri, x-rays and ct scans using deep learning and
machine learning methodologies. Diagnostics, 10(8), p.518.
Alghrairi, M., Sulaiman, N. and Mutashar, S., 2020. Health care
monitoring and treatment for coronary artery diseases: challenges and
issues. Sensors, 20(15), p.4303.
Jung, H., 2021. Basic physical principles and clinical applications of
computed tomography. Progress in Medical Physics, 52(1), pp.1-17.
Seeram, E., 2018. Computed tomography: a technical
review. Radiologic technology, 89(3), pp.279CT-302CT.
Serrell, E.C. and Best, S.L., 2022. Imaging in stone diagnosis and
surgical planning. Current Opinion in Urology, 52(4), pp.397-404.
Nakamura, Y., Higaki, T., Tatsugami, F., Honda, Y., Narita, K.,
Akagi, M. and Awai, K., 2020. Possibility of deep learning in medical
imaging focusing improvement of computed tomography image
quality. Journal of computer assisted tomography, 44(2), pp.161-167.
Abdalla, M.A.M., 2019. Evaluation of Patient Effective Dose and
Organ Dose during Chest Computed Tomography(Doctoral
dissertation, Sudan University of Science and Technology).
Romans, L., 2018. Computed Tomography for Technologists: A
comprehensive text. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
MeA, N., 2021. COMPARISON OF IMAGE QUALITY AND
DIFFERENT RADIATION DOSES IN COMPUTERIZED
TOMOGRAPHIC DIAGNOSTICS. Acta Medica Saliniana, 50(1-2).
McCollough, C.H. and Schueler, B.A., 2000. Calculation of effective
dose. Medical physics, 27(5), pp.828-837.
Furlow, B., 2010. Radiation dose in computed tomography.
Radiologic technology, 81(5), pp.437-450.
Shope, T.B., Gagne, R.M. and Johnson, G.C., 1981. A method for
describing the doses delivered by transmission x ray computed
tomography. Medical physics, 8(4), pp.488-495.
Abuzaid, M.M., Elshami, W., Tekin, H.O., Sulieman, A. and Bradley,
D.A., 2021. Comparison of Radiation dose and Image Quality in Head
CT Scans Among Multidetector CT Scanners. Radiation protection
dosimetry, 196(1-2), pp.10-16.
Al Ewaidat, H., Zheng, X., Khader, Y., Abdelrahman, M., Alhasan,
M.K.M., Rawashdeh, M.A., Al Mousa, D.S. and Alawneh, K.Z.A., 2018.
Assessment of radiation dose and image quality of multidetector
computed tomography. Iranian Journal of Radiology, 15(3).
Pera, C.M., Girjoaba, O.I., Cucu, A. and Iosif, M., 2016. Comparison
of radiation dose in abdomen-pelvis and trunk imaging between 64 slice
and 16 slice CT. Physica Medica, 32, p.295.
Karim, M.K.A., Hashim, S.,Sabarudin, A., Bradley, D.A. and Bahruddin,
N.A., 2016. Evaluating organ dose and radiation risk of routine CT
examinations in Johor Malaysia. Sains Malaysiana, 45(4),pp.567-573.
Jaffe, T.A., Yoshizumi, T.T., Toncheva, G., Anderson-Evans, C.,
Lowry, C., Miller, C.M., Nelson, R.C. and Ravin, C.E., 2009. Radiation
dose for body CT protocols: variability of scanners at one institution.
American Journal of Roentgenology, 193(4), pp.l141-1147.
Alzimami, K., 2014. Assessment of radiation doses to paediatric
patients in computed tomography procedures. Polish Journal of
radiology,79, p.344.
Rawashdeh, M., Saade, C., Al Mousa, D.S., Abdelrahman, M.,
Kumar, P. and McEntee, M., 2023. A new approach to dose reference
levels in pediatric CT: Age and size-specific dose estimation. Radiation
Physics and Chemistry, 205, p.l10698.
Satharasinghe, D.M., Jeyasugiththan, J., Wanninayake, W.M.N.M.B.
and Pallewatte, A.S., 2021. Paediatric diagnostic reference levels in
computed tomography: a systematic review. Journal of Radiological
Protection, 41(1), p.R1.
Amaoui, B., Semghouli, S., Massaq, M., Aabid, M., Hakam, O.K.,
Choukri, A. and El Kharras, A., 2019. Radiation Doses from Computed
Tomography Practice in Regional Hospital Center Hassan II of Agadir,
Morocco. Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, 10(10).
Adam, A.H.Y., 2019. Assessment of Radiation Dose to Head, Chest and Abdomen of Adult Patients Underwent Computed Tomography Examination-Khartoum State-Sudan (Doctoral dissertation, Sudan University of Science and Technology).
Yoon, H., Kim, J., Lim, H.J. and Lee, M.J., 2021. Image quality assessment of pediatric chest and abdomen CT by deep learning reconstruction. BMC medical imaging, 21(1), pp.1-11.
Yan, J., Schaefferkoetter, J., Conti, M. and Townsend, D., 2016. A method to assess image quality for low-dose PET: analysis of SNR, CNR, bias and image noise. Cancer Imaging, 16(1), pp.l-12.
Summerlin, D., Willis, J., Boggs, R., Johnson, L.M. and Porter, K.K., 2022. Radiation Dose Reduction Opportunities in Vascular Imaging. Tomography, 8(5), pp.2618-2638.
Published
Issue
Section
License
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
