Image quality and radiation doses in abdominal CT: A multicenter study

To benchmark image quality and corresponding radiation doses for acute abdominal CT examination across different laboratories and CT manufacturers. An anthropomorphic phantom was scanned once with local abdominal CT protocols at 40 CT scanners, from four vendors, in thirty-three sites. Quantitative...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of radiology 2024-09, Vol.178, p.111642, Article 111642
Hauptverfasser: Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg, Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld, Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg, Schulz, Anselm, Aaløkken, Trond Mogens, Johansson, Ellen, Johansen, Safora, Mussmann, Bo, Brunborg, Cathrine, Eikvar, Lars Kristian, Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 111642
container_title European journal of radiology
container_volume 178
creator Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg
Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld
Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg
Schulz, Anselm
Aaløkken, Trond Mogens
Johansson, Ellen
Johansen, Safora
Mussmann, Bo
Brunborg, Cathrine
Eikvar, Lars Kristian
Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.
description To benchmark image quality and corresponding radiation doses for acute abdominal CT examination across different laboratories and CT manufacturers. An anthropomorphic phantom was scanned once with local abdominal CT protocols at 40 CT scanners, from four vendors, in thirty-three sites. Quantitative image quality was evaluated by CNR and SNR in the liver and kidney parenchyma. Qualitative image quality was assessed by visual grading analysis performed by three experienced radiologists using a five-point Likert scale to score thirteen image quality criteria. The CTDIvol was recorded for each scan. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated for the continuous variables, and the intraclass correlation coefficient was used to investigate interrater reliability between the radiologists. CTDIvol ranged from 3.5 to 12 mGy (median 5.3 mGy, third quartile 6.7 mGy). SNR in liver parenchyma ranged from 4.4 to 14.4 (median 8.5), and CNR ranged from 2.7 to 11.2 (median 6.1). A weak correlation was found between CTDIvol and CNR (r = 0.270, p = 0.092). Variations in CNR across scanners at the same dose level CTDIvol were observed. No significant difference in CTDIvol or CNR was found based on scanner installation year. The oldest scanners had a 15 % higher median CTDIvol and a 12 % lower median CNR. The ICC showed acceptable agreement for all dose groups: low (ICC=0.889), medium (ICC=0.767), high (ICC=0.847), and in low (ICC=0.803) and medium (ICC=0.811) CNR groups. There was large variation in radiation dose and image quality across the different CT scanners. Interestingly, the weak correlation between CTDIvol and CNR indicates that higher doses do not consistently improve CNR, indicating a need for systematic assessment and optimization of image quality and radiation doses for the abdominal CT examination.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111642
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3086379890</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0720048X24003589</els_id><sourcerecordid>3086379890</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c284t-aaba6230f15918bde95b1051eaf3371f7eab90a0e7e0437d960fcbc712abaa443</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLxDAUhYMoOj5-gSBZuul4k3SaRnAhgy8Q3Ci4C7fJrWToQ5NWmH9vx1GXru7mO-dwP8ZOBcwFiOJiNadVRD-XIPO5EKLI5Q6biVLLTGupd9kMtIQM8vL1gB2mtAKARW7kPjtQBrRRUs7Y7UOLb8Q_RmzCsObYeT51BhxC33HfJ0o8dBwr37ehw4Yvny_5NW_HZgiOuoEiT8Po18dsr8Ym0cnPPWIvtzfPy_vs8enuYXn9mDlZ5kOGWGEhFdRiYURZeTKLSsBCENZKaVFrwsoAAmmCXGlvCqhd5bSQUxDzXB2x823ve-w_RkqDbUNy1DTYUT8mq6AslDalgQlVW9TFPqVItX2PocW4tgLsRqBd2W-BdiPQbgVOqbOfgbFqyf9lfo1NwNUWoOnNz0DRJheoc-RDJDdY34d_B74ALOuB7g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3086379890</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Image quality and radiation doses in abdominal CT: A multicenter study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg ; Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld ; Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg ; Schulz, Anselm ; Aaløkken, Trond Mogens ; Johansson, Ellen ; Johansen, Safora ; Mussmann, Bo ; Brunborg, Cathrine ; Eikvar, Lars Kristian ; Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.</creator><creatorcontrib>Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg ; Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld ; Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg ; Schulz, Anselm ; Aaløkken, Trond Mogens ; Johansson, Ellen ; Johansen, Safora ; Mussmann, Bo ; Brunborg, Cathrine ; Eikvar, Lars Kristian ; Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.</creatorcontrib><description>To benchmark image quality and corresponding radiation doses for acute abdominal CT examination across different laboratories and CT manufacturers. An anthropomorphic phantom was scanned once with local abdominal CT protocols at 40 CT scanners, from four vendors, in thirty-three sites. Quantitative image quality was evaluated by CNR and SNR in the liver and kidney parenchyma. Qualitative image quality was assessed by visual grading analysis performed by three experienced radiologists using a five-point Likert scale to score thirteen image quality criteria. The CTDIvol was recorded for each scan. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated for the continuous variables, and the intraclass correlation coefficient was used to investigate interrater reliability between the radiologists. CTDIvol ranged from 3.5 to 12 mGy (median 5.3 mGy, third quartile 6.7 mGy). SNR in liver parenchyma ranged from 4.4 to 14.4 (median 8.5), and CNR ranged from 2.7 to 11.2 (median 6.1). A weak correlation was found between CTDIvol and CNR (r = 0.270, p = 0.092). Variations in CNR across scanners at the same dose level CTDIvol were observed. No significant difference in CTDIvol or CNR was found based on scanner installation year. The oldest scanners had a 15 % higher median CTDIvol and a 12 % lower median CNR. The ICC showed acceptable agreement for all dose groups: low (ICC=0.889), medium (ICC=0.767), high (ICC=0.847), and in low (ICC=0.803) and medium (ICC=0.811) CNR groups. There was large variation in radiation dose and image quality across the different CT scanners. Interestingly, the weak correlation between CTDIvol and CNR indicates that higher doses do not consistently improve CNR, indicating a need for systematic assessment and optimization of image quality and radiation doses for the abdominal CT examination.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0720-048X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1872-7727</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7727</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111642</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39079322</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Abdominal CT ; Computed Tomography ; Humans ; Image quality ; Multicenter study ; Phantom study ; Phantoms, Imaging ; Radiation Dosage ; Radiation doses ; Radiography, Abdominal - methods ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><ispartof>European journal of radiology, 2024-09, Vol.178, p.111642, Article 111642</ispartof><rights>2024 The Author(s)</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c284t-aaba6230f15918bde95b1051eaf3371f7eab90a0e7e0437d960fcbc712abaa443</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X24003589$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39079322$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schulz, Anselm</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aaløkken, Trond Mogens</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansson, Ellen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Safora</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mussmann, Bo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunborg, Cathrine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eikvar, Lars Kristian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.</creatorcontrib><title>Image quality and radiation doses in abdominal CT: A multicenter study</title><title>European journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><description>To benchmark image quality and corresponding radiation doses for acute abdominal CT examination across different laboratories and CT manufacturers. An anthropomorphic phantom was scanned once with local abdominal CT protocols at 40 CT scanners, from four vendors, in thirty-three sites. Quantitative image quality was evaluated by CNR and SNR in the liver and kidney parenchyma. Qualitative image quality was assessed by visual grading analysis performed by three experienced radiologists using a five-point Likert scale to score thirteen image quality criteria. The CTDIvol was recorded for each scan. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated for the continuous variables, and the intraclass correlation coefficient was used to investigate interrater reliability between the radiologists. CTDIvol ranged from 3.5 to 12 mGy (median 5.3 mGy, third quartile 6.7 mGy). SNR in liver parenchyma ranged from 4.4 to 14.4 (median 8.5), and CNR ranged from 2.7 to 11.2 (median 6.1). A weak correlation was found between CTDIvol and CNR (r = 0.270, p = 0.092). Variations in CNR across scanners at the same dose level CTDIvol were observed. No significant difference in CTDIvol or CNR was found based on scanner installation year. The oldest scanners had a 15 % higher median CTDIvol and a 12 % lower median CNR. The ICC showed acceptable agreement for all dose groups: low (ICC=0.889), medium (ICC=0.767), high (ICC=0.847), and in low (ICC=0.803) and medium (ICC=0.811) CNR groups. There was large variation in radiation dose and image quality across the different CT scanners. Interestingly, the weak correlation between CTDIvol and CNR indicates that higher doses do not consistently improve CNR, indicating a need for systematic assessment and optimization of image quality and radiation doses for the abdominal CT examination.</description><subject>Abdominal CT</subject><subject>Computed Tomography</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image quality</subject><subject>Multicenter study</subject><subject>Phantom study</subject><subject>Phantoms, Imaging</subject><subject>Radiation Dosage</subject><subject>Radiation doses</subject><subject>Radiography, Abdominal - methods</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><issn>0720-048X</issn><issn>1872-7727</issn><issn>1872-7727</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLxDAUhYMoOj5-gSBZuul4k3SaRnAhgy8Q3Ci4C7fJrWToQ5NWmH9vx1GXru7mO-dwP8ZOBcwFiOJiNadVRD-XIPO5EKLI5Q6biVLLTGupd9kMtIQM8vL1gB2mtAKARW7kPjtQBrRRUs7Y7UOLb8Q_RmzCsObYeT51BhxC33HfJ0o8dBwr37ehw4Yvny_5NW_HZgiOuoEiT8Po18dsr8Ym0cnPPWIvtzfPy_vs8enuYXn9mDlZ5kOGWGEhFdRiYURZeTKLSsBCENZKaVFrwsoAAmmCXGlvCqhd5bSQUxDzXB2x823ve-w_RkqDbUNy1DTYUT8mq6AslDalgQlVW9TFPqVItX2PocW4tgLsRqBd2W-BdiPQbgVOqbOfgbFqyf9lfo1NwNUWoOnNz0DRJheoc-RDJDdY34d_B74ALOuB7g</recordid><startdate>202409</startdate><enddate>202409</enddate><creator>Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg</creator><creator>Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld</creator><creator>Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg</creator><creator>Schulz, Anselm</creator><creator>Aaløkken, Trond Mogens</creator><creator>Johansson, Ellen</creator><creator>Johansen, Safora</creator><creator>Mussmann, Bo</creator><creator>Brunborg, Cathrine</creator><creator>Eikvar, Lars Kristian</creator><creator>Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202409</creationdate><title>Image quality and radiation doses in abdominal CT: A multicenter study</title><author>Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg ; Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld ; Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg ; Schulz, Anselm ; Aaløkken, Trond Mogens ; Johansson, Ellen ; Johansen, Safora ; Mussmann, Bo ; Brunborg, Cathrine ; Eikvar, Lars Kristian ; Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c284t-aaba6230f15918bde95b1051eaf3371f7eab90a0e7e0437d960fcbc712abaa443</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Abdominal CT</topic><topic>Computed Tomography</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image quality</topic><topic>Multicenter study</topic><topic>Phantom study</topic><topic>Phantoms, Imaging</topic><topic>Radiation Dosage</topic><topic>Radiation doses</topic><topic>Radiography, Abdominal - methods</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schulz, Anselm</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aaløkken, Trond Mogens</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansson, Ellen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Safora</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mussmann, Bo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunborg, Cathrine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eikvar, Lars Kristian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Røhme, Linn Andrea Gjerberg</au><au>Homme, Tora Hilde Fjeld</au><au>Johansen, Elin Cathrine Kiperberg</au><au>Schulz, Anselm</au><au>Aaløkken, Trond Mogens</au><au>Johansson, Ellen</au><au>Johansen, Safora</au><au>Mussmann, Bo</au><au>Brunborg, Cathrine</au><au>Eikvar, Lars Kristian</au><au>Martinsen, Anne Catrine T.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Image quality and radiation doses in abdominal CT: A multicenter study</atitle><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><date>2024-09</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>178</volume><spage>111642</spage><pages>111642-</pages><artnum>111642</artnum><issn>0720-048X</issn><issn>1872-7727</issn><eissn>1872-7727</eissn><abstract>To benchmark image quality and corresponding radiation doses for acute abdominal CT examination across different laboratories and CT manufacturers. An anthropomorphic phantom was scanned once with local abdominal CT protocols at 40 CT scanners, from four vendors, in thirty-three sites. Quantitative image quality was evaluated by CNR and SNR in the liver and kidney parenchyma. Qualitative image quality was assessed by visual grading analysis performed by three experienced radiologists using a five-point Likert scale to score thirteen image quality criteria. The CTDIvol was recorded for each scan. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated for the continuous variables, and the intraclass correlation coefficient was used to investigate interrater reliability between the radiologists. CTDIvol ranged from 3.5 to 12 mGy (median 5.3 mGy, third quartile 6.7 mGy). SNR in liver parenchyma ranged from 4.4 to 14.4 (median 8.5), and CNR ranged from 2.7 to 11.2 (median 6.1). A weak correlation was found between CTDIvol and CNR (r = 0.270, p = 0.092). Variations in CNR across scanners at the same dose level CTDIvol were observed. No significant difference in CTDIvol or CNR was found based on scanner installation year. The oldest scanners had a 15 % higher median CTDIvol and a 12 % lower median CNR. The ICC showed acceptable agreement for all dose groups: low (ICC=0.889), medium (ICC=0.767), high (ICC=0.847), and in low (ICC=0.803) and medium (ICC=0.811) CNR groups. There was large variation in radiation dose and image quality across the different CT scanners. Interestingly, the weak correlation between CTDIvol and CNR indicates that higher doses do not consistently improve CNR, indicating a need for systematic assessment and optimization of image quality and radiation doses for the abdominal CT examination.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>39079322</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111642</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0720-048X
ispartof European journal of radiology, 2024-09, Vol.178, p.111642, Article 111642
issn 0720-048X
1872-7727
1872-7727
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3086379890
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Abdominal CT
Computed Tomography
Humans
Image quality
Multicenter study
Phantom study
Phantoms, Imaging
Radiation Dosage
Radiation doses
Radiography, Abdominal - methods
Reproducibility of Results
Sensitivity and Specificity
Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods
title Image quality and radiation doses in abdominal CT: A multicenter study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T14%3A51%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Image%20quality%20and%20radiation%20doses%20in%20abdominal%20CT:%20A%20multicenter%20study&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=R%C3%B8hme,%20Linn%20Andrea%20Gjerberg&rft.date=2024-09&rft.volume=178&rft.spage=111642&rft.pages=111642-&rft.artnum=111642&rft.issn=0720-048X&rft.eissn=1872-7727&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111642&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3086379890%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3086379890&rft_id=info:pmid/39079322&rft_els_id=S0720048X24003589&rfr_iscdi=true