In vivo radiation dosimetry and image quality of turbo-flash and retrospective dual-source CT coronary angiography

Purpose To compare measured radiation dose (MD), estimated radiation dose (ED) and image quality in coronary computed tomography between turbo-flash (TFP) and retrospective protocol (RP) and correlate MD with size-specific dose estimates (SSDE). Materials and methods In this prospective study, we se...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Radiologia medica 2020-02, Vol.125 (2), p.117-127
Hauptverfasser: Schicchi, Nicolò, Mari, Alberto, Fogante, Marco, Esposto Pirani, Paolo, Agliata, Giacomo, Tosi, Niccolò, Palumbo, Pierpaolo, Cannizzaro, Ester, Bruno, Federico, Splendiani, Alessandra, Di Cesare, Ernesto, Maggi, Stefania, Giovagnoni, Andrea
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose To compare measured radiation dose (MD), estimated radiation dose (ED) and image quality in coronary computed tomography between turbo-flash (TFP) and retrospective protocol (RP) and correlate MD with size-specific dose estimates (SSDE). Materials and methods In this prospective study, we selected 68 patients (mean age, 59.2 ± 9.7 years) undergoing 192 × 2 dual-source CT (SOMATOM Force, Siemens) to rule out coronary artery disease. Thirty-one underwent TFP and 37 RP. To evaluate in vivo MD, thermoluminescent dosimeters were placed, superficially, at thyroid and heart level, left breast areola and left hemi-thorax. MD in each site, and ED parameters, such as volume CT dose index (CTDI vol ), SSDE, dose length product (DLP), effective dose (E), were compared between two protocols with a t test. Image quality was compared between two protocols. Inter-observer agreement was evaluated with a kappa coefficient ( k ). In each protocol, MD was correlated with SSDE using a Pearson coefficient ( r ). Results Comparing TFP and RP, MD at thyroid (1.43 vs. 2.58 mGy; p  = 0.0408), heart (3.58 vs. 28.72 mGy; p 
ISSN:0033-8362
1826-6983
DOI:10.1007/s11547-019-01103-y