Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 9/2006

01-09-2006 | Experimental

Dose reduction in multidetector CT of the urinary tract. Studies in a phantom model

Authors: E. Coppenrath, T. Meindl, P. Herzog, R. Khalil, U. Mueller-Lisse, L. Krenn, M. Reiser, U. G. Mueller-Lisse

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 9/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

A novel ureter phantom was developed for investigations of image quality and dose in CT urography. The ureter phantom consisted of a water box (14 cm×32 cm×42 cm) with five parallel plastic tubes (diameter 2.7 mm) filled with different concentrations of contrast media (1.88–30 mg iodine/ml). CT density of the tubes and noise of the surrounding water were determined using two multidetector scanners (Philips MX8000 with four rows, Siemens Sensation 16 with 16 rows) with varying tube current–time product (15–100 mAs per slice), voltage (90 kV, 100 kV, 120 kV), pitch (0.875–1.75), and slice thickness (1 mm, 2 mm, 3.2 mm). Contrast-to-noise ratio as a parameter of image quality was correlated with dose (CTDI) and was compared with image evaluation by two radiologists. The CT densities of different concentrations of contrast media and contrast-to-noise ratio were significantly higher when low voltages (90 kV versus 120 kV, 100 kV versus 120 kV) were applied. Smaller slice thickness (1 mm versus 2 mm) did not change CT density but decreased contrast-to-noise ratio due to increased noise. Contrast phantom studies showed favourable effects of low tube voltage on image quality in the low dose range. This may facilitate substantial dose reduction in CT urography.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Shrimpton PC, Jones DG, Hillier MC, Wall BF, LeHeron JC, Faulkner K (1991) Survey of CT practice of the UK. Part 2. Dosimetric aspects. NRPB-249. HMSO, London Shrimpton PC, Jones DG, Hillier MC, Wall BF, LeHeron JC, Faulkner K (1991) Survey of CT practice of the UK. Part 2. Dosimetric aspects. NRPB-249. HMSO, London
2.
go back to reference Galanski M, Nagel HD, Stamm G (2002) Practice of CT radiation exposure in the Federal Republic of Germany. Results of a national survey 1999. ZVEI, Central Federation of Electromedical Technics, Frankfurt Galanski M, Nagel HD, Stamm G (2002) Practice of CT radiation exposure in the Federal Republic of Germany. Results of a national survey 1999. ZVEI, Central Federation of Electromedical Technics, Frankfurt
3.
go back to reference Barnes TB, Lakshminarayanan AV (1989) Computed tomography: physical principles and image quality considerations. In: Lee JKT, Sagel SS, Stanley RJ (eds). Computed body tomography. Raven Press, New York pp 1–21 Barnes TB, Lakshminarayanan AV (1989) Computed tomography: physical principles and image quality considerations. In: Lee JKT, Sagel SS, Stanley RJ (eds). Computed body tomography. Raven Press, New York pp 1–21
4.
go back to reference Heneghan JP, McGuire KA, Leder RA, DeLong DM, Yoshizumi T, Nelson RC (2003) Helical CT for nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis: comparison of conventional and reduced radiation-dose techniques. Radiology 229:575–580PubMedCrossRef Heneghan JP, McGuire KA, Leder RA, DeLong DM, Yoshizumi T, Nelson RC (2003) Helical CT for nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis: comparison of conventional and reduced radiation-dose techniques. Radiology 229:575–580PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Tack D, Sourtzis S, Delpierre I, DeMartelaer V, Gevenois PA (2003) Low-dose unenhanced multidetector CT of patients with suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:305–311PubMed Tack D, Sourtzis S, Delpierre I, DeMartelaer V, Gevenois PA (2003) Low-dose unenhanced multidetector CT of patients with suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:305–311PubMed
6.
go back to reference Spielmann AL, Heneghan JP, Lee LJ, Yoshizumi T, Nelson RC (2002) Decreasing the radiation dose for renal stone CT: a feasibility study of single- and multidetector CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:1058–1062PubMed Spielmann AL, Heneghan JP, Lee LJ, Yoshizumi T, Nelson RC (2002) Decreasing the radiation dose for renal stone CT: a feasibility study of single- and multidetector CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:1058–1062PubMed
7.
go back to reference Hamm M, Knöpfle E, Wartenberg S, Wawroschek F, Weckermann D, Harzmann R (2002) Low dose unenhanced helical computerized tomography for the evaluation of acute flank pain. J Urol 167:1687–1691CrossRefPubMed Hamm M, Knöpfle E, Wartenberg S, Wawroschek F, Weckermann D, Harzmann R (2002) Low dose unenhanced helical computerized tomography for the evaluation of acute flank pain. J Urol 167:1687–1691CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Tublin ME, Murphy ME, Delong DM, Tessler FN, Kliewer MA (2002) Conspicuity of renal calculi at unenhanced CT: effects of calculus composition and size and CT technique. Radiology 225:91–96PubMedCrossRef Tublin ME, Murphy ME, Delong DM, Tessler FN, Kliewer MA (2002) Conspicuity of renal calculi at unenhanced CT: effects of calculus composition and size and CT technique. Radiology 225:91–96PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference O’Malley ME, Hahn PF, Yoder IC, Gazelle GS, McGovern FJ, Mueller PR (2003) Comparison of excretory phase, helical computed tomography with intravenous urography in patients with painless haematuria. Clin Radiol 58:294–300CrossRef O’Malley ME, Hahn PF, Yoder IC, Gazelle GS, McGovern FJ, Mueller PR (2003) Comparison of excretory phase, helical computed tomography with intravenous urography in patients with painless haematuria. Clin Radiol 58:294–300CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Wintersperger B, Jakobs T, Herzog P, Schaller S, Nikolaou K, Suess C, Weber C, Reiser M, Becker C (2005) Aorto-iliac multidetector-row CT angiography with low kV settings: improves vessel enhancement and simultaneous reduction of radiation dose. Eur Radiol 15:334–341CrossRefPubMed Wintersperger B, Jakobs T, Herzog P, Schaller S, Nikolaou K, Suess C, Weber C, Reiser M, Becker C (2005) Aorto-iliac multidetector-row CT angiography with low kV settings: improves vessel enhancement and simultaneous reduction of radiation dose. Eur Radiol 15:334–341CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference European Commission (1999) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Report. EUR 16262 EN. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg pp 69–78 European Commission (1999) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Report. EUR 16262 EN. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg pp 69–78
12.
go back to reference Scheck R, Coppenrath EM, Baeuml A, Hahn K (1998) Radiation dose and image quality in spiral computed tomography: results of a multicenter study at eight radiological institutions. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 80:283–286 Scheck R, Coppenrath EM, Baeuml A, Hahn K (1998) Radiation dose and image quality in spiral computed tomography: results of a multicenter study at eight radiological institutions. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 80:283–286
13.
go back to reference Nagel HD, Galanski M , Hidajat N, Maier W, Schmidt T (2002) Radiation exposition in computer tomography—basics, influence factors, dose calculation, optimization, data, concepts. CTB Publications, Hamburg Nagel HD, Galanski M , Hidajat N, Maier W, Schmidt T (2002) Radiation exposition in computer tomography—basics, influence factors, dose calculation, optimization, data, concepts. CTB Publications, Hamburg
14.
go back to reference Hidajat N, Vogl T, Schroeder RJ, Felix R (1996) Calculated organ doses and effective dosage for computerized tomography examination of the thorax and abdomen: are these doses realistic! Fortschr Rontgenstr 164:382–387CrossRef Hidajat N, Vogl T, Schroeder RJ, Felix R (1996) Calculated organ doses and effective dosage for computerized tomography examination of the thorax and abdomen: are these doses realistic! Fortschr Rontgenstr 164:382–387CrossRef
15.
go back to reference McNicholas MM, Raptopoulos VD, Schwartz RK, et al (1998) Excretory phase CT urography for opacification of the urinary collecting system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:1261–1267PubMed McNicholas MM, Raptopoulos VD, Schwartz RK, et al (1998) Excretory phase CT urography for opacification of the urinary collecting system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:1261–1267PubMed
16.
go back to reference Grossfeld GD, Litwin MS, Wolf JS, Hricak H, Schuler CL, Agerter DC, Carroll PR (2001) Evaluation of asymptomatic microscopic hematuria in adults: The American Urological Association Best Practice Policy—Part II: Patient evaluation, cytology, voided markers, imaging, cystoscopy, nephrology evaluation, and follow-up. Urology 57:604–610CrossRefPubMed Grossfeld GD, Litwin MS, Wolf JS, Hricak H, Schuler CL, Agerter DC, Carroll PR (2001) Evaluation of asymptomatic microscopic hematuria in adults: The American Urological Association Best Practice Policy—Part II: Patient evaluation, cytology, voided markers, imaging, cystoscopy, nephrology evaluation, and follow-up. Urology 57:604–610CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Yuh BL, Cohan RH (1999) Different phases of renal enhancement: role in detecting and characterizing renal masses during helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:747–755PubMed Yuh BL, Cohan RH (1999) Different phases of renal enhancement: role in detecting and characterizing renal masses during helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:747–755PubMed
18.
go back to reference Lang EK, Macchia RJ, Thomas R, Watson RA, Marberger M, Lechner G, Gayle B, Richter F (2003) Improved detection of renal pathologic features on multiphasic helical CT compared with IVU in patients presenting with microscopic hematuria. Urology 61:528–532CrossRefPubMed Lang EK, Macchia RJ, Thomas R, Watson RA, Marberger M, Lechner G, Gayle B, Richter F (2003) Improved detection of renal pathologic features on multiphasic helical CT compared with IVU in patients presenting with microscopic hematuria. Urology 61:528–532CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Smith RC, Rosenfield T, Choe KA, et al (1995) Acute flank pain: comparison of non-contrast-enhanced CT and intravenous urography. Radiology 194:789–794PubMed Smith RC, Rosenfield T, Choe KA, et al (1995) Acute flank pain: comparison of non-contrast-enhanced CT and intravenous urography. Radiology 194:789–794PubMed
20.
go back to reference Nolte-Ernsting C, Staatz G, Wildberger J, Adam G (2003) MR-urography and CT urography: principles, examination techniques, applications. Fortschr Rontgenstr 175:211–222CrossRef Nolte-Ernsting C, Staatz G, Wildberger J, Adam G (2003) MR-urography and CT urography: principles, examination techniques, applications. Fortschr Rontgenstr 175:211–222CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Perlman ES, Rosenfield AT, Wexler JS, Glickman MG (1996) CT urography in the evaluation of urinary tract disease. J Comput Assist Tomogr 20:620–626CrossRefPubMed Perlman ES, Rosenfield AT, Wexler JS, Glickman MG (1996) CT urography in the evaluation of urinary tract disease. J Comput Assist Tomogr 20:620–626CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Maudgil DD, McHugh K (2002) The role of computed tomography in modern paediatric uroradiology. Eur J Radiol 43:129–138CrossRefPubMed Maudgil DD, McHugh K (2002) The role of computed tomography in modern paediatric uroradiology. Eur J Radiol 43:129–138CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Kalra MK, Maher MM, Sahani DV, Blake M, Saini S (2002) Current status of multidetector computed tomography urography in imaging of the urinary tract. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 31:210–221CrossRefPubMed Kalra MK, Maher MM, Sahani DV, Blake M, Saini S (2002) Current status of multidetector computed tomography urography in imaging of the urinary tract. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 31:210–221CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Raptopoulos V, McNamara A (2005) Improved pelvicalyceal visualization with multidetector computed tomography urography, comparison with helical computed tomography. Eur Radiol 15:1834–1840CrossRefPubMed Raptopoulos V, McNamara A (2005) Improved pelvicalyceal visualization with multidetector computed tomography urography, comparison with helical computed tomography. Eur Radiol 15:1834–1840CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Nawfel RD, Judy PH, Schleipman AR, Silverman SG (2004) Patient radiation dose at CT urography and conventional urography. Radiology 232:126–132PubMedCrossRef Nawfel RD, Judy PH, Schleipman AR, Silverman SG (2004) Patient radiation dose at CT urography and conventional urography. Radiology 232:126–132PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Sheafor DH, Hertzberg BS, Freed KS, et al (2000) Non-enhanced helical CT and US in the emergency evaluation of patients with renal colic: prospective comparison. Radiology 217:792–797PubMed Sheafor DH, Hertzberg BS, Freed KS, et al (2000) Non-enhanced helical CT and US in the emergency evaluation of patients with renal colic: prospective comparison. Radiology 217:792–797PubMed
28.
go back to reference Starck G, Lönn L, Cederblad A, Forssell-Aronsson E, Sjöström L, Alpsten M (2002) A method to obtain the same levels of CT image noise for patients for various sizes, to minimize radiation dose. Br J Radiol 75:140–150PubMed Starck G, Lönn L, Cederblad A, Forssell-Aronsson E, Sjöström L, Alpsten M (2002) A method to obtain the same levels of CT image noise for patients for various sizes, to minimize radiation dose. Br J Radiol 75:140–150PubMed
29.
go back to reference Olcott EW, Sommer FG, Napel S (1997) Accuracy of detection and measurement of renal calculi: in vitro comparison of three-dimensional spiral-CT, radiography, and nephrotomography. Radiology 204:19–25PubMed Olcott EW, Sommer FG, Napel S (1997) Accuracy of detection and measurement of renal calculi: in vitro comparison of three-dimensional spiral-CT, radiography, and nephrotomography. Radiology 204:19–25PubMed
30.
go back to reference Seltzer SM (1993) Calculation of photo mass energy-transfer and mass energy absorption coefficients. Radiat Res 136:147–170PubMedCrossRef Seltzer SM (1993) Calculation of photo mass energy-transfer and mass energy absorption coefficients. Radiat Res 136:147–170PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference McCollough CH, Brusewitz MR, Vrtiska TJ, King BF, LeRoy AJ, Quam JP, Hattery RR (2001) Image quality and dose comparison among screen-film, computed , and CT scanned projection radiography: application to CT urography. Radiology 221:395–403PubMedCrossRef McCollough CH, Brusewitz MR, Vrtiska TJ, King BF, LeRoy AJ, Quam JP, Hattery RR (2001) Image quality and dose comparison among screen-film, computed , and CT scanned projection radiography: application to CT urography. Radiology 221:395–403PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Schaller S, et al (1999) Technical basics and applications of multislice CT. Radiologe 39:923–931CrossRefPubMed Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Schaller S, et al (1999) Technical basics and applications of multislice CT. Radiologe 39:923–931CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Gkanatsios NA, Huda W, Peter KR (2002) Effects of radiographic techniques (kVp and mAs) on image quality and patient doses in digital subtraction angiography. Med Phys 29:1643–1650CrossRefPubMed Gkanatsios NA, Huda W, Peter KR (2002) Effects of radiographic techniques (kVp and mAs) on image quality and patient doses in digital subtraction angiography. Med Phys 29:1643–1650CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Tzedakis A, Damilakis J, Perisinakis K, Statakis J, Gourtsoyiannis N (2005) The effect of z overscanning on patient effective dose from multidetector helical computed tomography examinations. Med Physic 32:1621–1629CrossRef Tzedakis A, Damilakis J, Perisinakis K, Statakis J, Gourtsoyiannis N (2005) The effect of z overscanning on patient effective dose from multidetector helical computed tomography examinations. Med Physic 32:1621–1629CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Meindl T, Coppenrath E, Kahlil R, Mueller-Lisse UL, Reiser MF, Mueller-Lisse UG (2006) CT urography: retrospective determination of optimal delay time after intravenous contrast administration. Eur Radiol, in press Meindl T, Coppenrath E, Kahlil R, Mueller-Lisse UL, Reiser MF, Mueller-Lisse UG (2006) CT urography: retrospective determination of optimal delay time after intravenous contrast administration. Eur Radiol, in press
Metadata
Title
Dose reduction in multidetector CT of the urinary tract. Studies in a phantom model
Authors
E. Coppenrath
T. Meindl
P. Herzog
R. Khalil
U. Mueller-Lisse
L. Krenn
M. Reiser
U. G. Mueller-Lisse
Publication date
01-09-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 9/2006
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0138-5

Other articles of this Issue 9/2006

European Radiology 9/2006 Go to the issue