Cargando…

3D cone-beam CT with a twin robotic x-ray system in elbow imaging: comparison of image quality to high-resolution multidetector CT

BACKGROUND: Elbow imaging is challenging with conventional multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), while cone-beam CT (CBCT) provides superior options. We compared intra-individually CBCT versus MDCT image quality in cadaveric elbows. METHODS: A twin robotic x-ray system with new CBCT mode and a h...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grunz, Jan-Peter, Weng, Andreas Max, Kunz, Andreas Steven, Veyhl-Wichmann, Maike, Schmitt, Rainer, Gietzen, Carsten Herbert, Pennig, Lenhard, Herz, Stefan, Ergün, Süleyman, Bley, Thorsten Alexander, Gassenmaier, Tobias
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7477066/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32895778
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41747-020-00177-y
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Elbow imaging is challenging with conventional multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), while cone-beam CT (CBCT) provides superior options. We compared intra-individually CBCT versus MDCT image quality in cadaveric elbows. METHODS: A twin robotic x-ray system with new CBCT mode and a high-resolution clinical MDCT were compared in 16 cadaveric elbows. Both systems were operated with a dedicated low-dose (LD) protocol (equivalent volume CT dose index [CTDI(vol(16 cm))] = 3.3 mGy) and a regular clinical scan dose (RD) protocol (CTDI(vol(16 cm)) = 13.8 mGy). Image quality was evaluated by two radiologists (R1 and R2) on a seven-point Likert scale, and estimation of signal intensity in cancellous bone was conducted. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) statistics were used. RESULTS: The CBCT prototype provided superior subjective image quality compared to MDCT scans (for RD, p ≤ 0.004; for LD, p ≤ 0.001). Image quality was rated very good or excellent in 100% of the cases by both readers for RD CBCT, 100% (R1) and 93.8% (R2) for LD CBCT, 62.6% and 43.8% for RD MDCT, and 0.0% and 0.0% for LD MDCT. Single-measure ICC was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.91–0.97; p < 0.001). Software-based assessment supported subjective findings with less “undecided” pixels in CBCT than dose-equivalent MDCT (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found between LD CBCT and RD MDCT. CONCLUSIONS: In cadaveric elbow studies, the tested cone-beam CT prototype delivered superior image quality compared to high-end multidetector CT and showed a potential for considerable dose reduction.