P. Apisarnthanarak, Anawat Sriwaleephun, Sastrawut Thammakittiphan, Wimonrat Lornimitdee, Atchariya Klinhom, Tarntip Suwatananonthakij, K. Muangsomboon, Wanwarang Teerasamit, Sopa Pongpornsup, W. Chaiyasoot
{"title":"Siriraj医院腹部CT辐射剂量降低(第三期)","authors":"P. Apisarnthanarak, Anawat Sriwaleephun, Sastrawut Thammakittiphan, Wimonrat Lornimitdee, Atchariya Klinhom, Tarntip Suwatananonthakij, K. Muangsomboon, Wanwarang Teerasamit, Sopa Pongpornsup, W. Chaiyasoot","doi":"10.46475/aseanjr.v22i1.82","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE: To compare the image quality and the radiation dose between fixed tube current (FTC) low dose abdominal CT currently performed at our hospital and new automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) low dose abdominal CT.\nMATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively performed ATCM low dose abdominal CT in 88 participants who had prior FTC low dose CT for comparison. Four experienced abdominal radiologists independently and blindly assessed the quality of FTC and ATCM low dose CT images by using a 5-point-scale satisfaction score (1 = unacceptable, 2 = poor, 3 = average, 4 = good, and 5 = excellent image quality). Each reader selected the preferred image set between FTC and ATCM low dose techniques for each participant. The image noise of the liver and the aorta in both techniques was measured. The volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) of both techniques was compared.\nRESULTS: The mean satisfaction scores (SD) for FTC and ATCM low dose CT were 4.38 (0.66) and 4.38 (0.64), respectively with the ranges of 3 to 5 in both techniques, which were all acceptable for CT interpretation. The preferred image set between FTC and ATCM low dose techniques of each participant randomly selected by each reader were varied, depending on the readers’ opinions. The mean image noise of the aorta on FTC and ATCM low dose CT accounted for 34.75 and 36.46, respectively, while the mean image noise of the liver was 28.86 and 29.81, respectively. The mean CTDIvol (SD) of FTC and ATCM low dose CT were 8.42 (0.32) and 8.12 (0.43) mGy, respectively. \nCONCLUSION: FTC and ATCM low dose abdominal CT provided comparable acceptable image quality and showed no clinical significance in radiation dose optimization.","PeriodicalId":180936,"journal":{"name":"The ASEAN Journal of Radiology","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abdominal CT radiation dose reduction at Siriraj Hospital (Phase III)\",\"authors\":\"P. Apisarnthanarak, Anawat Sriwaleephun, Sastrawut Thammakittiphan, Wimonrat Lornimitdee, Atchariya Klinhom, Tarntip Suwatananonthakij, K. Muangsomboon, Wanwarang Teerasamit, Sopa Pongpornsup, W. Chaiyasoot\",\"doi\":\"10.46475/aseanjr.v22i1.82\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE: To compare the image quality and the radiation dose between fixed tube current (FTC) low dose abdominal CT currently performed at our hospital and new automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) low dose abdominal CT.\\nMATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively performed ATCM low dose abdominal CT in 88 participants who had prior FTC low dose CT for comparison. Four experienced abdominal radiologists independently and blindly assessed the quality of FTC and ATCM low dose CT images by using a 5-point-scale satisfaction score (1 = unacceptable, 2 = poor, 3 = average, 4 = good, and 5 = excellent image quality). Each reader selected the preferred image set between FTC and ATCM low dose techniques for each participant. The image noise of the liver and the aorta in both techniques was measured. The volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) of both techniques was compared.\\nRESULTS: The mean satisfaction scores (SD) for FTC and ATCM low dose CT were 4.38 (0.66) and 4.38 (0.64), respectively with the ranges of 3 to 5 in both techniques, which were all acceptable for CT interpretation. The preferred image set between FTC and ATCM low dose techniques of each participant randomly selected by each reader were varied, depending on the readers’ opinions. The mean image noise of the aorta on FTC and ATCM low dose CT accounted for 34.75 and 36.46, respectively, while the mean image noise of the liver was 28.86 and 29.81, respectively. The mean CTDIvol (SD) of FTC and ATCM low dose CT were 8.42 (0.32) and 8.12 (0.43) mGy, respectively. \\nCONCLUSION: FTC and ATCM low dose abdominal CT provided comparable acceptable image quality and showed no clinical significance in radiation dose optimization.\",\"PeriodicalId\":180936,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The ASEAN Journal of Radiology\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The ASEAN Journal of Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46475/aseanjr.v22i1.82\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The ASEAN Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46475/aseanjr.v22i1.82","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abdominal CT radiation dose reduction at Siriraj Hospital (Phase III)
OBJECTIVE: To compare the image quality and the radiation dose between fixed tube current (FTC) low dose abdominal CT currently performed at our hospital and new automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) low dose abdominal CT.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively performed ATCM low dose abdominal CT in 88 participants who had prior FTC low dose CT for comparison. Four experienced abdominal radiologists independently and blindly assessed the quality of FTC and ATCM low dose CT images by using a 5-point-scale satisfaction score (1 = unacceptable, 2 = poor, 3 = average, 4 = good, and 5 = excellent image quality). Each reader selected the preferred image set between FTC and ATCM low dose techniques for each participant. The image noise of the liver and the aorta in both techniques was measured. The volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) of both techniques was compared.
RESULTS: The mean satisfaction scores (SD) for FTC and ATCM low dose CT were 4.38 (0.66) and 4.38 (0.64), respectively with the ranges of 3 to 5 in both techniques, which were all acceptable for CT interpretation. The preferred image set between FTC and ATCM low dose techniques of each participant randomly selected by each reader were varied, depending on the readers’ opinions. The mean image noise of the aorta on FTC and ATCM low dose CT accounted for 34.75 and 36.46, respectively, while the mean image noise of the liver was 28.86 and 29.81, respectively. The mean CTDIvol (SD) of FTC and ATCM low dose CT were 8.42 (0.32) and 8.12 (0.43) mGy, respectively.
CONCLUSION: FTC and ATCM low dose abdominal CT provided comparable acceptable image quality and showed no clinical significance in radiation dose optimization.