Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published online before print May 9, 2002, 10.1148/radiol.2241011126
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by van Gelder, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Stoker, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by van Gelder, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Stoker, J.

CT Colonography at Different Radiation Dose Levels: Feasibility of Dose Reduction1

Rogier E. van Gelder, MD, Henk W. Venema, PhD, Iwo W. O. Serlie, MSc, C. Yung Nio, MD, Rogier M. Determann, Corinne A. Tipker, MSc, Frans M. Vos, PhD, Afina S. Glas, MD, Joep F. W. Bartelsman, MD, Patrick M. M. Bossuyt, PhD, Johan S. Laméris, MD, PhD and Jaap Stoker, MD, PhD

1 From the Depts of Radiology (R.E.v.G., H.W.V., C.Y.N., R.M.D., C.A.T., F.M.V., J.S.L., J.S.), Medical Physics (H.W.V.), Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (A.S.G., P.M.M.B.), and Gastroenterology (J.F.W.B.), Academic Medical Ctr, Univ of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands; and Pattern Recognition Group, Dept of Applied Physics, Technical Univ of Delft, the Netherlands (I.W.O.S., F.M.V.). From the 2000 RSNA scientific assembly. Received June 28, 2001; revision requested Aug 16; revision received Oct 12; accepted Dec 14. Address correspondence to R.E.v.G. (e-mail: r.e.vangelder@amc.uva.nl).



View larger version (76K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. Unfolded cubic CT colonographic projection of a polyp.

 


View larger version (37K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. Sensitivity and specificity at different cutoff values for 100- and simulated 50- and 30-mAs CT colonography for the identification of patients with and those without polyps. Sensitivity was equal at all dose levels, whereas specificity was better at the simulated 30-mAs level. Solid line with + indicates sensitivity with 100- and simulated 50- and 30-mAs CT colonography. Dashed line with X indicates specificity with 100-mAs CT colonography. Dashed line with {triangleup} indicates specificity with 50-mAs CT colonography. Dashed line with {square} indicates specificity with 30-mAs CT colonography.

 


View larger version (128K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. Images of a 5-mm polyp (arrows) detected at CT colonography at the 100- (bottom left) and simulated 50- (bottom middle) and 30-mAs (bottom right) levels with corresponding source images (top).

 


View larger version (30K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 4. Graph shows effective dose for one CT examination of the abdomen (for one position) for the 13 published CT colonographic scan protocols ({square}) and for those used at present ({bullet}). Overlap of scans in multiple-scan protocols was disregarded. The relationship between dose per section and effective dose for the Mx8000 multisection CT scanner used in the present study is indicated with a solid line. In all protocols except five, 120 kV was used. In four protocols, 110 kV was used (indicated with an X), and in one protocol, 140 kV was used (indicated with a +).

 




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2002 by the Radiological Society of North America.