The optimization of helical thoracic CT

Kenneth D. Hopper, Claudia Kasales, Scott W. Wise, Thomas R. TenHave, James R. Hills, Rickhesvar Mahraj, Ronald Wilson, Jill S. Weaver

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Our purpose was to determine the optimal helical thoracic CT scanning protocol. Method: Three adult Suffolk sheep under general anesthesia were repeatedly scanned by a variety of variable thickness helical and conventional plus thin section high resolution (lung gold standard) CT sequences, reconstructed for mediastinal (standard interpolator and algorithm) and lung parenchymal (extrasharp interpolator, bone algorithm) detail. The images were evaluated in a random order by five separate blinded, experienced imagers utilizing a predetermined grading scale. Results: At equivalent slice thicknesses, the mediastinal images showed no statistically significant differences between conventional and helical CT using pitches of 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0. However, the 5-mm-thick sections, regardless of technique, performed better than did either the 2- or the 10-mm-thick section images. For the lung interstitium, there was an obvious and marked advantage to reconstructing the lung images separately from the mediastinal images with edge-enhancing algorithms and interpolators. With 1-mm-high mA thin section, high resolution lung CT as the gold standard, 2 mm conventional and helical pitch 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 images were all graded equivalent. Of the 5 mm images, the helical pitches of 1.0 and 1.5 were graded equivalent to the gold standard. All of the 10 mm lung sections using both conventional and helical CT were graded statistically worse than the gold standard (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The use of helical CT with a 5 mm beam collimation and a pitch of 1.0 or 1.5 reconstructed twice to maximize both the mediastinal and the lung parenchymal detail provides the optimal way to routinely evaluate the chest.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)418-424
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Computer Assisted Tomography
Volume22
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 7 1998

Fingerprint

Spiral Computed Tomography
Thorax
Lung
General Anesthesia
Sheep
Bone and Bones

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Hopper, K. D., Kasales, C., Wise, S. W., TenHave, T. R., Hills, J. R., Mahraj, R., ... Weaver, J. S. (1998). The optimization of helical thoracic CT. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 22(3), 418-424. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004728-199805000-00013
Hopper, Kenneth D. ; Kasales, Claudia ; Wise, Scott W. ; TenHave, Thomas R. ; Hills, James R. ; Mahraj, Rickhesvar ; Wilson, Ronald ; Weaver, Jill S. / The optimization of helical thoracic CT. In: Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography. 1998 ; Vol. 22, No. 3. pp. 418-424.
@article{6848fba0e4ac4bb9aa0a9f38742cc88a,
title = "The optimization of helical thoracic CT",
abstract = "Purpose: Our purpose was to determine the optimal helical thoracic CT scanning protocol. Method: Three adult Suffolk sheep under general anesthesia were repeatedly scanned by a variety of variable thickness helical and conventional plus thin section high resolution (lung gold standard) CT sequences, reconstructed for mediastinal (standard interpolator and algorithm) and lung parenchymal (extrasharp interpolator, bone algorithm) detail. The images were evaluated in a random order by five separate blinded, experienced imagers utilizing a predetermined grading scale. Results: At equivalent slice thicknesses, the mediastinal images showed no statistically significant differences between conventional and helical CT using pitches of 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0. However, the 5-mm-thick sections, regardless of technique, performed better than did either the 2- or the 10-mm-thick section images. For the lung interstitium, there was an obvious and marked advantage to reconstructing the lung images separately from the mediastinal images with edge-enhancing algorithms and interpolators. With 1-mm-high mA thin section, high resolution lung CT as the gold standard, 2 mm conventional and helical pitch 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 images were all graded equivalent. Of the 5 mm images, the helical pitches of 1.0 and 1.5 were graded equivalent to the gold standard. All of the 10 mm lung sections using both conventional and helical CT were graded statistically worse than the gold standard (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The use of helical CT with a 5 mm beam collimation and a pitch of 1.0 or 1.5 reconstructed twice to maximize both the mediastinal and the lung parenchymal detail provides the optimal way to routinely evaluate the chest.",
author = "Hopper, {Kenneth D.} and Claudia Kasales and Wise, {Scott W.} and TenHave, {Thomas R.} and Hills, {James R.} and Rickhesvar Mahraj and Ronald Wilson and Weaver, {Jill S.}",
year = "1998",
month = "9",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1097/00004728-199805000-00013",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "418--424",
journal = "Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography",
issn = "0363-8715",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

The optimization of helical thoracic CT. / Hopper, Kenneth D.; Kasales, Claudia; Wise, Scott W.; TenHave, Thomas R.; Hills, James R.; Mahraj, Rickhesvar; Wilson, Ronald; Weaver, Jill S.

In: Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, Vol. 22, No. 3, 07.09.1998, p. 418-424.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The optimization of helical thoracic CT

AU - Hopper, Kenneth D.

AU - Kasales, Claudia

AU - Wise, Scott W.

AU - TenHave, Thomas R.

AU - Hills, James R.

AU - Mahraj, Rickhesvar

AU - Wilson, Ronald

AU - Weaver, Jill S.

PY - 1998/9/7

Y1 - 1998/9/7

N2 - Purpose: Our purpose was to determine the optimal helical thoracic CT scanning protocol. Method: Three adult Suffolk sheep under general anesthesia were repeatedly scanned by a variety of variable thickness helical and conventional plus thin section high resolution (lung gold standard) CT sequences, reconstructed for mediastinal (standard interpolator and algorithm) and lung parenchymal (extrasharp interpolator, bone algorithm) detail. The images were evaluated in a random order by five separate blinded, experienced imagers utilizing a predetermined grading scale. Results: At equivalent slice thicknesses, the mediastinal images showed no statistically significant differences between conventional and helical CT using pitches of 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0. However, the 5-mm-thick sections, regardless of technique, performed better than did either the 2- or the 10-mm-thick section images. For the lung interstitium, there was an obvious and marked advantage to reconstructing the lung images separately from the mediastinal images with edge-enhancing algorithms and interpolators. With 1-mm-high mA thin section, high resolution lung CT as the gold standard, 2 mm conventional and helical pitch 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 images were all graded equivalent. Of the 5 mm images, the helical pitches of 1.0 and 1.5 were graded equivalent to the gold standard. All of the 10 mm lung sections using both conventional and helical CT were graded statistically worse than the gold standard (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The use of helical CT with a 5 mm beam collimation and a pitch of 1.0 or 1.5 reconstructed twice to maximize both the mediastinal and the lung parenchymal detail provides the optimal way to routinely evaluate the chest.

AB - Purpose: Our purpose was to determine the optimal helical thoracic CT scanning protocol. Method: Three adult Suffolk sheep under general anesthesia were repeatedly scanned by a variety of variable thickness helical and conventional plus thin section high resolution (lung gold standard) CT sequences, reconstructed for mediastinal (standard interpolator and algorithm) and lung parenchymal (extrasharp interpolator, bone algorithm) detail. The images were evaluated in a random order by five separate blinded, experienced imagers utilizing a predetermined grading scale. Results: At equivalent slice thicknesses, the mediastinal images showed no statistically significant differences between conventional and helical CT using pitches of 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0. However, the 5-mm-thick sections, regardless of technique, performed better than did either the 2- or the 10-mm-thick section images. For the lung interstitium, there was an obvious and marked advantage to reconstructing the lung images separately from the mediastinal images with edge-enhancing algorithms and interpolators. With 1-mm-high mA thin section, high resolution lung CT as the gold standard, 2 mm conventional and helical pitch 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 images were all graded equivalent. Of the 5 mm images, the helical pitches of 1.0 and 1.5 were graded equivalent to the gold standard. All of the 10 mm lung sections using both conventional and helical CT were graded statistically worse than the gold standard (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The use of helical CT with a 5 mm beam collimation and a pitch of 1.0 or 1.5 reconstructed twice to maximize both the mediastinal and the lung parenchymal detail provides the optimal way to routinely evaluate the chest.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031858970&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031858970&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00004728-199805000-00013

DO - 10.1097/00004728-199805000-00013

M3 - Article

C2 - 9606383

AN - SCOPUS:0031858970

VL - 22

SP - 418

EP - 424

JO - Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

JF - Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

SN - 0363-8715

IS - 3

ER -