256-MSCT image acquisition with sequential axial scans: Evaluation of image quality and resolution in a phantom study

RoFo Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Rontgenstrahlen und der Bildgebenden Verfahren

Volumn 184, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 248-255

  Klink, Thorsten ^a   Nagel, H ^b   Schwartz, B ^a   Regier, M ^a   Adam, G ^a   Begemann, P G ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

^b Wissenschaft and Technik für Die Radiologie ^*  (Germany)

Author keywords

256 MSCT; artifacts; axial image acquisition; image quality and resolution; phantom; step and shoot

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; OPTICAL RESOLUTION; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION DOSE;

ALGORITHMS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; HUMANS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84857232582     PISSN: 14389029     EISSN: 14389010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1299046     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Earls JP, Berman EL, Urban BA et al. Prospectively gated transverse coronary CT angiography versus retrospectively gated helical technique: improved image quality and reduced radiation dose. Radiology: 2008; 246 742 753
2. Hsieh J, Londt J, Vass M et al. Step-and-shoot data acquisition and reconstruction for cardiac x-ray computed tomography. Medical physics: 2006; 33 4236 4248 (Pubitemid 44673113)
3. Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology: 2008; 248 431 437
4. Hirai N, Horiguchi J, Fujioka C et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG-gated 64-detector coronary CT angiography: assessment of image quality, stenosis, and radiation dose. Radiology: 2008; 248 424 430
5. Ko SM, Kim NR, Kim DH et al. Assessment of image quality and radiation dose in prospective ECG-triggered coronary CT angiography compared with retrospective ECG-gated coronary CT angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging: 2009; 26 93 101
6. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Hoffmann U et al. Assessment of coronary remodeling in stenotic and nonstenotic coronary atherosclerotic lesions by multidetector spiral computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol: 2004; 43 842 847 (Pubitemid 38296486)
7. Pugliese F, Mollet NR, Runza G et al. Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Radiol: 2006; 16 575 582 (Pubitemid 44149369)
8. Dewey M, de Vries H, de Vries L et al. The present and future of cardiac CT in research and clinical practice: moderated discussion and scientific debate with representatives from the four main vendors. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2010; 182 313 321
9. Dewey M, Zimmermann E, Deissenrieder F et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography by 320-row computed tomography with lower radiation exposure and maintained diagnostic accuracy: comparison of results with cardiac catheterization in a head-to-head pilot investigation. Circulation: 2009; 120 867 875
10. Walker M, Olszewski M, Desai M. New radiation dose saving technologies for 256-slice cardiac computed tomography angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging: 2009; 25 189 199
11. Schuleri KH, George RT, Lardo AC et al. Applications of cardiac multidetector CT beyond coronary angiography. Nat Rev Cardiol: 2009; 6 699 710
12. Klass O, Walker M, Siebach A et al. Prospectively gated axial CT coronary angiography: comparison of image quality and effective radiation dose between 64- and 256-slice CT. Eur Radiol: 2010; 20 1124 1131
13. Flohr T, Stierstorfer K, Raupach R et al. Performance evaluation of a 64-slice CT system with z-flying focal spot. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2004; 176 1803 10 (Pubitemid 39626396)
14. Flohr TG, Stierstorfer K, Ulzheimer S et al. Image reconstruction and image quality evaluation for a 64-slice CT scanner with z-flying focal spot. Med Phys: 2005; 32 2536 2547 (Pubitemid 41197191)
15. Kyriakou Y, Kachelriess M, Knaup M et al. Impact of the z-flying focal spot on resolution and artifact behavior for a 64-slice spiral CT scanner. Eur Radiol: 2006; 16 1206 1215 (Pubitemid 43840819)
16. Schlosser T, Hunold P, Voigtländer T et al. Coronary artery calcium scoring: influence of reconstruction interval and reconstruction increment using 64-MDCT. American journal of roentgenology: 2007; 188 1063 1068 (Pubitemid 46496944)
17. Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Becker C et al. Cardiac imaging by means of electrocardiographically gated multisection spiral CT: initial experience. Radiology: 2000; 217 564 571
18. Horiguchi J, Matsuura N, Yamamoto H et al. Variability of repeated coronary artery calcium measurements by 1.25-mm- and 2.5-mm-thickness images on prospective electrocardiograph-triggered 64-slice CT. Eur Radiol: 2008; 18 209 216 (Pubitemid 351242522)
19. Marin D, Catalano C, De Filippis G et al. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: added value of coronal reformations from isotropic voxels with 64-MDCT. Am J Roentgenol: 2009; 192 180 187
20. Nishino M, Kubo T, Kataoka ML et al. Evaluation of thoracic abnormalities on 64-row multi-detector row CT: comparison between axial images versus coronal reformations. Eur J Radiol: 2006; 59 33 41
21. Nishino M, Kubo T, Kataoka ML et al. Evaluation of pulmonary embolisms using coronal reformations on 64-row multidetector-row computed tomography: Comparison with axial images. J Comput Assist Tomogr: 2006; 30 233 237 (Pubitemid 43739302)
22. Begemann PG, van Stevendaal U, Koester R et al. Evaluation of the influence of acquisition and reconstruction parameters for 16-row multidetector CT on coronary calcium scoring using a stationary and dynamic cardiac phantom. Eur Radiol: 2007; 17 1985 1994 (Pubitemid 47097456)
23. Weigold W, Olszewski M, Walker M. Low-dose prospectively gated 256-slice coronary computed tomographic angiography. The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging (formerly Cardiac Imaging): 2009; 25 217 230
24. Wu W, Budovec J, Foley WD. Prospective and retrospective ECG gating for thoracic CT angiography: a comparative study. Am J Roentgenol: 2009; 193 955 963
25. Jin KN, Park EA, Shin CI et al. Retrospective versus prospective ECG-gated dual-source CT in pediatric patients with congenital heart diseases: comparison of image quality and radiation dose. The international journal of cardiovascular imaging: 2010; 26 63 73
26. Begemann PG, van Stevendaal U, Manzke R et al. Evaluation of spatial and temporal resolution for ECG-gated 16-row multidetector CT using a dynamic cardiac phantom. Eur Radiol: 2005; 15 1015 26 (Pubitemid 41166735)