CT vs. VolumeScope: image quality and dose comparison

被引：0
|
作者：
Vasiliev, VN [1 ]
Gamaliy, AF [1 ]
Zaytsev, MY [1 ]
Zaytseva, KV [1 ]
机构：
[1] Russian Sci Ctr Roentgenol & Radiol, Moscow 117997, Russia
来源：
X-Ray and Neutron Capillary Optics II | 2005年 / 5943卷
关键词：
VolumeScope; absorbed dose; digital filter; image quality; anthropomorphic phantom; 3D visualization;
D O I：
10.1117/12.637996
中图分类号：
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号：
0831 ;
摘要：
A number of examinations were performed on the VolumeScope Compton scatter tomographic device and a CT scanner (Siemens Somatom Plus 4) using an anthropomorphic tissue-equivalent heterogeneous phantom simulating a human body. Three main parts of the phantom were under examination: head, thorax and pelvis. An absorbed dose in the phantom was measured by LiF thermoluminescent detectors. The CT scanner demonstrated better space resolution in cross-plane and lower statistical noise. On the other hand, absorbed dose due to CT scanning is about 20 times higher at the same points of measurement. Examples of reconstructed images are presented.
引用
收藏
页码：248 / 254
页数：7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Pediatric CT Dose and Image Quality Optimization
    Stevens, G.
    Singh, R.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 41 (06) : 139 - 140
  • [32] Comparison of image quality between conventional and low-dose nonenhanced head CT
    Mullins, ME
    Lev, MH
    Bove, P
    O'Reilly, CE
    Saini, S
    Rhea, JT
    Thrall, JH
    Hunter, GJ
    Hamberg, LM
    Gonzalez, G
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, 2004, 25 (04) : 533 - 538
  • [33] Determinants of perceived image quality: ghosting vs. brightness
    Wilcox, LM
    Stewart, JAD
    STEREOSCOPIC DISPLAYS AND VIRTUAL REALITY SYSTEMS X, 2003, 5006 : 263 - 268
  • [34] Elastographic image quality vs. tissue motion in vivo
    Chandrasekhar, R.
    Ophir, J.
    Krouskop, T.
    Ophir, K.
    ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2006, 32 (06): : 847 - 855
  • [35] Patient dose and image quality of a cone-beam CT system for SPECT/CT: comparison with 16 slice CT
    Vandevoorde, C.
    Vandendriessche, D.
    D'Asseler, Y.
    Lambert, B.
    Goethals, I.
    Bacher, K.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2013, 40 : S222 - S222
  • [36] EOSedge vs. standard digital radiography: image quality and dose exposure in hip-focused scanning
    Parret, Camille
    Herman, Fanchon
    Cyteval, Catherine
    Pastor, Maxime
    ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2024, 144 (08) : 3841 - 3849
  • [37] COMPARISON OF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IMAGE QUALITY USING INTRAVENOUS VS. INTRAOSSEOUS CONTRAST ADMINISTRATION IN SWINE
    Cohen, Jason
    Duncan, Luke
    Triner, Wayne
    Rea, Jeffrey
    Siskin, Gary
    King, Christopher
    JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2015, 49 (05): : 771 - 777
  • [38] Low kilovolt "prospective ECG-triggering" vs. "retrospective ECG-gating" coronary CTA: comparison of image quality and radiation dose
    Gokalp, G.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH, 2019, 17 (02): : 209 - 216
  • [39] Image quality vs. sampling strategy for offset flat-panel cone-beam CT
    Hansis, Eberhard
    Sowards-Emmerd, David
    Bredno, Joerg
    Wang, Jiong
    Shao, Lingxiong
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2011, 52
  • [40] Deep Learning Vs. Iterative Reconstruction in CT Dose Reduction and Image Texture Preservation:A Live Animal Study
    Zhang, J.
    Raslau, F.
    Ganesh, H.
    Escott, E.
    Zhang, J.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 48 (06)
12345