Technical Note: Performance comparison of ultra-high-resolution scan modes of two clinical computed tomography systems

Hiroki Kawashima; Katsuhiro Ichikawa; Tadanori Takata; Hiroji Nagata; Minori Hoshika; Noriaki Akagi

doi:10.1002/mp.13949

Technical Note: Performance comparison of ultra-high-resolution scan modes of two clinical computed tomography systems

Med Phys. 2020 Feb;47(2):488-497. doi: 10.1002/mp.13949. Epub 2019 Dec 25.

Authors

Hiroki Kawashima¹, Katsuhiro Ichikawa¹, Tadanori Takata², Hiroji Nagata³, Minori Hoshika⁴, Noriaki Akagi⁴

Affiliations

¹ Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Medical, Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences, Kanazawa University, 5-11-80 Kodatsuno, Kanazawa, 920-0942, Japan.
² Radiology Division, Kanazawa University Hospital, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, 920-8641, Japan.
³ Section of Radiological Technology, Department of Medical Technology, Kanazawa Medical University Hospital, Daigaku 1-1, Uchinada, Kahoku, 920-0293, Japan.
⁴ Departments of Radiology, Okayama University Hospital, 2-5-1 Shikatacho, Kitaku, Okayama, 700-8558, Japan.

PMID: 31808550
DOI: 10.1002/mp.13949

Abstract

Purpose: Two ultra-high-resolution (UHR) computed tomography (CT) scanners are clinically available. One is achieved by a CT system with a 0.25 mm × 160 row detector (Detector-UHR), whereas the other is with a 0.6 mm × 32 row detector with in-plane comb filtering in a dual source CT (Comb-UHR). We compared radiation dose efficiencies of the two UHR modes to that of a routine scan mode (RS), using physical image quality measures for an assumed condition of abdominal CT angiography (CTA).

Methods: A wire phantom, a 300-mm cylindrical water bath phantom, and a microdisk phantom were used for measuring the modulation transfer function (MTF), noise power spectrum (NPS), and slice sensitivity profiles (SSP), respectively, at CTDI_vol of 20 mGy. Images with minimal slice thicknesses were reconstructed by filtered back projection methods. System performance functions (SPF² ) based on the prewhitening theorem were calculated by dividing MTF² by NPS measurements. The ideal observer's detectability index (d'² ) was also estimated for a task corresponding to a 1-mm diameter vessel. Furthermore, a bar-pattern phantom placed in a water phantom resembling an adult abdomen was scanned, and the visibility of the bars was observed.

Results: System performance function (SPF² ) results showed that Comb-UHR has a 70% dose efficiency compared to RS and provides better than twofold SPF² compared to Detector-UHR. The d'² values of Detector-UHR, Comb-UHR, and RS were 6.5, 14.7, and 16.0, respectively. Although the bar-pattern phantom images were consistent with the SPF results, bar widths < 1.0 mm for Detector-UHR and < 0.75 mm for Comb-UHR and RS were not resolved.

Conclusions: Though both the UHR modes exhibited system performances extending to 2.6 cycles/mm, they appeared not to be advantageous compared to RS in the conditions applicable to abdominal CTA, because of their insufficient dose efficiencies.

Keywords: computed tomography; image quality; spatial resolution; system sensitivity; ultra-high resolution.

Publication types

Comparative Study

MeSH terms

Humans
Phantoms, Imaging
Radiation Dosage
Signal-To-Noise Ratio*
Tomography, X-Ray Computed / methods*

Grants and funding

17K16431/Japan Society for the Promotion of Science