1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Reducing radiation dose to the female breast during CT coronary angiography: A simulation study comparing breast shielding, angular tube current modulation, reduced kV, and partial angle protocols using an unknown-location signal-detectability metric
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.4816302
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/40/8/10.1118/1.4816302
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/40/8/10.1118/1.4816302

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

(a) Topogram of the whole body (noncropped) female phantom. (b) Anteroposterior and (c) lateral topograms of the cropped phantom. The scan field-of-view is represented by the space between the white horizontal lines and corresponds to a CTCA scan.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

(a) A full field-of-view reconstructed image of the phantom (4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml signal-present). The black box in the heart region indicates the signal search ROI (52.5 × 40 mm) used for calculating for both tasks. (b) An example of a signal-present ROI with the 1-mm, 6.0 mg/ml signals. (c) An example of a signal-present ROI with the 4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml signals.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

An image of the phantom showing the 128° arc during which the tube current is turned off for the two partial-angle protocols.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

An image of the phantom with the breast shield.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

vs (a) breast dose and (b) lung dose for the 4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml signals. vs (c) breast dose and (d) lung dose for the 1-mm, 6.0 mg/ml signals. Note that error bars are present in the plots and represent one standard deviation in either direction, but in most cases are too small to see over the plot markers.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Noise vs (a) breast dose and (b) lung dose. Noise is measured as pixel standard deviation.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

CNR vs (a) breast dose and (b) lung dose for the 4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml signals. CNR vs (c) breast dose and (d) lung dose for the 1-mm, 6.0 mg/ml signals.

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Example of a 4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml signal-present image for each protocol at equivalent breast dose (≈21 mGy). Window/level is 400/115 HU for the 120 kV images, and 400/280 HU for the 80 kV images.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Percent change in (a) breast and (b) lung dose for each protocol, relative to the reference protocol, for both tasks.

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Example of a signal-present image for each protocol at equivalent (≈0.96). Window/level is 400/115 HU for the 120 kV images, and 400/280 HU for the 80 kV images.

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

(a) A 4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml signal-present image using the 80 kV partial protocol with ≈ 0.96 (the same image as shown in Fig. 10 ). This image yields 85.3% dose savings to the breast and 171.0% increase in noise relative to the reference protocol. (b) A 4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml signal-present image using the 80 kV partial protocol with five times the dose of that shown in (a), resulting in a 26.6% decrease in breast dose and 21.2% increase in noise, relative to the reference protocol, and an of 1.0. Both images are shown at a window/level of 400/280 HU.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Image quality metrics and lung doses for each protocol for the 4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml task at equivalent breast dose (≈21 mGy).

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Image quality metrics and lung doses for each protocol for the 1-mm, 6.0 mg/ml task at equivalent breast dose (≈81 mGy).

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Image quality metrics and dose estimates for each protocol at approximately equivalent (≈0.96) for the 4-mm, 3.25 mg/ml task.

Generic image for table
TABLE IV.

Image quality metrics and dose estimates for each protocol at approximately equivalent (≈0.96) for the 1-mm, 6.0 mg/ml task.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/40/8/10.1118/1.4816302
2013-07-29
2014-04-24
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Reducing radiation dose to the female breast during CT coronary angiography: A simulation study comparing breast shielding, angular tube current modulation, reduced kV, and partial angle protocols using an unknown-location signal-detectability metric
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/40/8/10.1118/1.4816302
10.1118/1.4816302
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM