Cargando…
Comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation
The purpose of this study was to reduce pediatric doses while maintaining or improving image quality scores without removing the grid from X‐ray beam. This study was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. Three piglets (5, 14, and 20 kg) were imaged using six different selectab...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690159/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26699297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i5.5379 |
_version_ | 1783279543945003008 |
---|---|
author | Strauss, Keith J. Racadio, John M. Abruzzo, Todd A. Johnson, Neil D. Patel, Manish N. Kukreja, Kamlesh U. den Hartog, Mark. J. H. Hoornaert, Bart P.A. Nachabe, Rami A. |
author_facet | Strauss, Keith J. Racadio, John M. Abruzzo, Todd A. Johnson, Neil D. Patel, Manish N. Kukreja, Kamlesh U. den Hartog, Mark. J. H. Hoornaert, Bart P.A. Nachabe, Rami A. |
author_sort | Strauss, Keith J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The purpose of this study was to reduce pediatric doses while maintaining or improving image quality scores without removing the grid from X‐ray beam. This study was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. Three piglets (5, 14, and 20 kg) were imaged using six different selectable detector air kerma ([Formula: see text]) per frame values (100%, 70%, 50%, 35%, 25%, 17.5%) with and without the grid. Number of distal branches visualized with diagnostic confidence relative to the injected vessel defined image quality score. Five pediatric interventional radiologists evaluated all images. Image quality score and piglet [Formula: see text] were statistically compared using analysis of variance and receiver operating curve analysis to define the preferred dose setting and use of grid for a visibility of 2nd and 3rd order vessel branches. Grid removal reduced both dose to subject and imaging quality by 26%. Third order branches could only be visualized with the grid present; 100% detector [Formula: see text] was required for smallest pig, while 70% detector [Formula: see text] was adequate for the two larger pigs. Second order branches could be visualized with grid at 17.5% detector [Formula: see text] for all three pig sizes. Without the grid, 50%, 35%, and 35% detector [Formula: see text] were required for smallest to largest pig, respectively. Grid removal reduces both dose and image quality score. Image quality scores can be maintained with less dose to subject with the grid in the beam as opposed to removed. Smaller anatomy requires more dose to the detector to achieve the same image quality score. PACS numbers: 87.53.Bn, 87.57.N‐, 87.57.cj, 87.59.cf, 87.59.Dj |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5690159 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56901592018-04-02 Comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation Strauss, Keith J. Racadio, John M. Abruzzo, Todd A. Johnson, Neil D. Patel, Manish N. Kukreja, Kamlesh U. den Hartog, Mark. J. H. Hoornaert, Bart P.A. Nachabe, Rami A. J Appl Clin Med Phys Medical Imaging The purpose of this study was to reduce pediatric doses while maintaining or improving image quality scores without removing the grid from X‐ray beam. This study was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. Three piglets (5, 14, and 20 kg) were imaged using six different selectable detector air kerma ([Formula: see text]) per frame values (100%, 70%, 50%, 35%, 25%, 17.5%) with and without the grid. Number of distal branches visualized with diagnostic confidence relative to the injected vessel defined image quality score. Five pediatric interventional radiologists evaluated all images. Image quality score and piglet [Formula: see text] were statistically compared using analysis of variance and receiver operating curve analysis to define the preferred dose setting and use of grid for a visibility of 2nd and 3rd order vessel branches. Grid removal reduced both dose to subject and imaging quality by 26%. Third order branches could only be visualized with the grid present; 100% detector [Formula: see text] was required for smallest pig, while 70% detector [Formula: see text] was adequate for the two larger pigs. Second order branches could be visualized with grid at 17.5% detector [Formula: see text] for all three pig sizes. Without the grid, 50%, 35%, and 35% detector [Formula: see text] were required for smallest to largest pig, respectively. Grid removal reduces both dose and image quality score. Image quality scores can be maintained with less dose to subject with the grid in the beam as opposed to removed. Smaller anatomy requires more dose to the detector to achieve the same image quality score. PACS numbers: 87.53.Bn, 87.57.N‐, 87.57.cj, 87.59.cf, 87.59.Dj John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5690159/ /pubmed/26699297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i5.5379 Text en © 2015 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Medical Imaging Strauss, Keith J. Racadio, John M. Abruzzo, Todd A. Johnson, Neil D. Patel, Manish N. Kukreja, Kamlesh U. den Hartog, Mark. J. H. Hoornaert, Bart P.A. Nachabe, Rami A. Comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation |
title | Comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation |
title_full | Comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation |
title_fullStr | Comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation |
title_short | Comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation |
title_sort | comparison of pediatric radiation dose and vessel visibility on angiographic systems using piglets as a surrogate: antiscatter grid removal vs. lower detector air kerma settings with a grid — a preclinical investigation |
topic | Medical Imaging |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690159/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26699297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i5.5379 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT strausskeithj comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation AT racadiojohnm comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation AT abruzzotodda comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation AT johnsonneild comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation AT patelmanishn comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation AT kukrejakamleshu comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation AT denhartogmarkjh comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation AT hoornaertbartpa comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation AT nachaberamia comparisonofpediatricradiationdoseandvesselvisibilityonangiographicsystemsusingpigletsasasurrogateantiscattergridremovalvslowerdetectorairkermasettingswithagridapreclinicalinvestigation |