Cargando…
Physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution CT scanner
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the technical performance of an ultra-high-resolution CT (UHRCT) system. METHODS: The physico-technical capabilities of a novel commercial UHRCT system were assessed and compared with those of a current-generation multi-detector (MDCT) system. The super-high-resolution (SHR)...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7160079/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32040726 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06635-5 |
_version_ | 1783522686091132928 |
---|---|
author | Oostveen, Luuk J. Boedeker, Kirsten L. Brink, Monique Prokop, Mathias de Lange, Frank Sechopoulos, Ioannis |
author_facet | Oostveen, Luuk J. Boedeker, Kirsten L. Brink, Monique Prokop, Mathias de Lange, Frank Sechopoulos, Ioannis |
author_sort | Oostveen, Luuk J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the technical performance of an ultra-high-resolution CT (UHRCT) system. METHODS: The physico-technical capabilities of a novel commercial UHRCT system were assessed and compared with those of a current-generation multi-detector (MDCT) system. The super-high-resolution (SHR) mode of the system uses 0.25 mm (at isocentre) detector elements (dels) in the in-plane and longitudinal directions, while the high-resolution (HR) mode bins two dels in the longitudinal direction. The normal-resolution (NR) mode bins dels 2 × 2, resulting in a del-size equivalent to that of the MDCT system. In general, standard procedures and phantoms were used to perform these assessments. RESULTS: The UHRCT MTF (10% MTF 4.1 lp/mm) is twice as high as that of the MDCT (10% MTF 1.9 lp/mm), which is comparable to the MTF in the NR mode (10% MTF 1.7 lp/mm). The width of the slice sensitivity profile in the SHR mode (FWHM 0.45 mm) is about 60% of that of the MDCT (FWHM 0.77 mm). Uniformity and CT numbers are within the expected range. Noise in the high-resolution modes has a higher magnitude and higher frequency components compared with MDCT. Low-contrast visibility is lower for the NR, HR and SHR modes compared with MDCT, but about a 14%, for NR, and 23%, for HR and SHR, dose increase gives the same results. CONCLUSIONS: HR and SHR mode scanning results in double the spatial resolution, with about a 23% increase in dose required to achieve the same low-contrast detectability. KEY POINTS: • Resolution on UHRCT is up to twice as high as for the tested MDCT. • With abdominal settings, UHRCT needs higher dose for the same low-contrast detectability as MDCT, but dose is still below achievable levels as defined by current diagnostic reference levels. • The UHRCT system used in normal-resolution mode yields comparable resolution and noise characteristics as the MDCT system. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-019-06635-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7160079 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71600792020-04-23 Physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution CT scanner Oostveen, Luuk J. Boedeker, Kirsten L. Brink, Monique Prokop, Mathias de Lange, Frank Sechopoulos, Ioannis Eur Radiol Computed Tomography OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the technical performance of an ultra-high-resolution CT (UHRCT) system. METHODS: The physico-technical capabilities of a novel commercial UHRCT system were assessed and compared with those of a current-generation multi-detector (MDCT) system. The super-high-resolution (SHR) mode of the system uses 0.25 mm (at isocentre) detector elements (dels) in the in-plane and longitudinal directions, while the high-resolution (HR) mode bins two dels in the longitudinal direction. The normal-resolution (NR) mode bins dels 2 × 2, resulting in a del-size equivalent to that of the MDCT system. In general, standard procedures and phantoms were used to perform these assessments. RESULTS: The UHRCT MTF (10% MTF 4.1 lp/mm) is twice as high as that of the MDCT (10% MTF 1.9 lp/mm), which is comparable to the MTF in the NR mode (10% MTF 1.7 lp/mm). The width of the slice sensitivity profile in the SHR mode (FWHM 0.45 mm) is about 60% of that of the MDCT (FWHM 0.77 mm). Uniformity and CT numbers are within the expected range. Noise in the high-resolution modes has a higher magnitude and higher frequency components compared with MDCT. Low-contrast visibility is lower for the NR, HR and SHR modes compared with MDCT, but about a 14%, for NR, and 23%, for HR and SHR, dose increase gives the same results. CONCLUSIONS: HR and SHR mode scanning results in double the spatial resolution, with about a 23% increase in dose required to achieve the same low-contrast detectability. KEY POINTS: • Resolution on UHRCT is up to twice as high as for the tested MDCT. • With abdominal settings, UHRCT needs higher dose for the same low-contrast detectability as MDCT, but dose is still below achievable levels as defined by current diagnostic reference levels. • The UHRCT system used in normal-resolution mode yields comparable resolution and noise characteristics as the MDCT system. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-019-06635-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-02-10 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7160079/ /pubmed/32040726 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06635-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Computed Tomography Oostveen, Luuk J. Boedeker, Kirsten L. Brink, Monique Prokop, Mathias de Lange, Frank Sechopoulos, Ioannis Physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution CT scanner |
title | Physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution CT scanner |
title_full | Physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution CT scanner |
title_fullStr | Physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution CT scanner |
title_full_unstemmed | Physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution CT scanner |
title_short | Physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution CT scanner |
title_sort | physical evaluation of an ultra-high-resolution ct scanner |
topic | Computed Tomography |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7160079/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32040726 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06635-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT oostveenluukj physicalevaluationofanultrahighresolutionctscanner AT boedekerkirstenl physicalevaluationofanultrahighresolutionctscanner AT brinkmonique physicalevaluationofanultrahighresolutionctscanner AT prokopmathias physicalevaluationofanultrahighresolutionctscanner AT delangefrank physicalevaluationofanultrahighresolutionctscanner AT sechopoulosioannis physicalevaluationofanultrahighresolutionctscanner |