Document Detail


Comparison between low (3:1) and high (6:1) pitch for routine abdominal/pelvic imaging with multislice computed tomography.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  12702997     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of low helical pitch acquisition (3:1) and high helical pitch acquisition (6:1) for routine abdominal/pelvic imaging with multislice computed tomography (CT). METHOD: Three hundred eighty-four patients referred for abdominal/pelvic CT were examined in a breath-hold on a multislice CT scanner (LightSpeed QX/I; General Electric Medical Systems, Milwaukee, WI). Patients were randomized and scanned with pitch of 3:1 or 6:1 using a constant 140 peak kV and 280-300 mA. Images were reconstructed at a 3.75-mm slice thickness. Direct comparison between the two pitches was possible in a subset of 40 patients who had a follow-up scan performed with the second pitch used in each patient. A comparison was also performed between standard dose CT using a pitch of 6:1 and 20% reduced radiation dose CT using a pitch of 3:1. Two readers performed a blind evaluation using a three-point scale for image quality, anatomic details, and motion artifacts. Statistical analysis was performed using a rank sum test and the Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: Overall image quality mean scores were 2.5 and 2.3 for a pitch of 3:1 and a pitch of 6:1, respectively (P = 0.134). Likewise, mean anatomic detail and motion artifact scores were 2.5 and 2.6 for a 3:1 pitch and 2.3 and 2.5 for a 6:1 pitch, respectively (P > 0.05). In patients with a direct comparison of the two pitches (with the standard radiation dose as well as with a 20% reduction in milliamperes), no statistically significant difference in the performance of the two pitches was observed (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Image quality with a high pitch (6:1) is acceptable for routine abdominal/pelvic CT.
Authors:
Dushyant Sahani; Sanjay Saini; Roy V D'Souza; Mary Jane O'Neill; Srinivasa R Prasad; Mannudeep K Kalra; Elkan F Halpern; Peter Mueller
Related Documents :
9843287 - Optimizing contrast enhancement during helical ct of the liver: a comparison of two bol...
10397357 - Pitfalls in image reconstruction of helical ct angiography: an experimental study.
10580937 - Ureteropelvic junction obstruction: use of helical ct for preoperative assessment--comp...
11248917 - Ct and stone fragility.
8741147 - Wilson's disease: resolution of mri lesions following long-term oral zinc therapy.
20044507 - Mr imaging of adenomas of the nonpigmented ciliary epithelium of the eye.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Clinical Trial; Comparative Study; Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of computer assisted tomography     Volume:  27     ISSN:  0363-8715     ISO Abbreviation:  J Comput Assist Tomogr     Publication Date:    2003 Mar-Apr
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2003-04-18     Completed Date:  2003-06-11     Revised Date:  2006-11-15    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7703942     Medline TA:  J Comput Assist Tomogr     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  105-9     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Division of Abdominal Imaging and Intervention, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. dsahani@partners.org
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Diagnostic Tests, Routine
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Observer Variation
Pelvis / radiography*
Prospective Studies
Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted
Radiography, Abdominal
Tomography, X-Ray Computed*

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Symptomatic adult annular pancreas.
Next Document:  Detection of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma with dynamic magnetic resonance imaging with sim...