Publications

Detailed Information

The Image Quality and Radiation Dose of 100-kVp versus 120-kVp ECG-Gated 16-Slice CT Coronary Angiography

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorPark, Eun-Ah-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Whal-
dc.contributor.authorKang, Jin-Hwa-
dc.contributor.authorYin, Yong Hu-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Jae Hyung-
dc.contributor.authorChung, Jin Wook-
dc.date.accessioned2012-07-02T05:38:35Z-
dc.date.available2012-07-02T05:38:35Z-
dc.date.issued2009-06-
dc.identifier.citationKOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY; Vol.10 3; 235-243ko_KR
dc.identifier.issn1229-6929-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/78086-
dc.description.abstractObjective: This study was conducted to assess the feasibility of performing 100-kVp electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated coronary CT angiography, as compared to 120-kVp ECG-gated coronary CT angiography. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated one hundred eighty five gencler- and body mass index-matched 16-slice coronary CT sets of data, which were obtained using either 100 kVp and 620 effective mAs or 120 kVp and 500 effective mAs. The density measurements (image noise, vessel density, signal-to-noise ratio [SNR] and contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR]) and the estimated radiation dose were calculated. As a preference test, two image readers were independently asked to choose one image from each pair of images. The results of both protocols were compared using the paired t-test or the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: The 100-kVp images showed significantly more noise and a significantly higher vessel density than did the 120-kVp images. There were no significant differences in the SNR and CNR. The estimated reduction of the radiation dose for the 100-kVp protocol was 24%; 7.8 +/- 0.4 mSV for 1 00-kVp and 10.1 +/- 1.0 mSV for 120-kVp (p < 0.001). The readers preferred the 1 00-kVp images for reading (reader 1, p = 0.01; reader 2, p = 0.06), with their preferences being stronger when the subject`s body mass index was less than 25. Conclusion: Reducing the tube kilovoltage from 120 to 100 kVp allows a significant reduction of the radiation dose without a significant change in the SNR and the CNR.ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherKOREAN RADIOLOGICAL SOCko_KR
dc.subjectCardiac CTko_KR
dc.subjectLow kVpko_KR
dc.subjectRadiation doseko_KR
dc.titleThe Image Quality and Radiation Dose of 100-kVp versus 120-kVp ECG-Gated 16-Slice CT Coronary Angiographyko_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor박은아-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor이활-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor강진화-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor인용후-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor정진욱-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor박재형-
dc.identifier.doi10.3348/kjr.2009.10.3.235-
dc.citation.journaltitleKOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY-
dc.description.citedreferenceStolzmann P, 2008, RADIOLOGY, V249, P71, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2483072032-
dc.description.citedreferenceEarls JP, 2008, RADIOLOGY, V246, P742, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2463070989-
dc.description.citedreferenceStolzmann P, 2008, EUR RADIOL, V18, P592, DOI 10.1007/s00330-007-0786-8-
dc.description.citedreferenceSchoenhagen P, 2008, EUR HEART J, V29, P153, DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm614-
dc.description.citedreferenceHeyer CM, 2007, RADIOLOGY, V245, P577, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2452061919-
dc.description.citedreferencePaul JF, 2007, EUR RADIOL, V17, P2028, DOI 10.1007/s00330-007-0584-3-
dc.description.citedreferenceMcCollough CH, 2007, RADIOLOGY, V243, P775, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2433061165-
dc.description.citedreferenceSchueller-Weidekamm C, 2006, RADIOLOGY, V241, P899, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2413040128-
dc.description.citedreferenceHsieh J, 2006, MED PHYS, V33, P4236, DOI 10.1118/1.2361078-
dc.description.citedreferenced`Agostino AG, 2006, EUR RADIOL, V16, P2137, DOI 10.1007/s00330-006-0218-1-
dc.description.citedreferenceHohl C, 2006, EUR RADIOL, V16, P1841, DOI 10.1007/s00330-005-0124-y-
dc.description.citedreferenceJohnson TRC, 2006, EUR RADIOL, V16, P1409, DOI 10.1007/s00330-006-0298-y-
dc.description.citedreferenceAbada HT, 2006, AM J ROENTGENOL, V186, pS387, DOI 10.2214/AJR.05.0216-
dc.description.citedreferenceHausleiter J, 2006, CIRCULATION, V113, P1305, DOI 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.602490-
dc.description.citedreferenceNAKAYAMA Y, 2006, AM J ROENTGENOL, V187, pW490-
dc.description.citedreferenceGhersin E, 2006, AM J ROENTGENOL, V186, P177, DOI 10.2214/AJR.04.1232-
dc.description.citedreferenceHaberl R, 2005, AM HEART J, V149, P1112, DOI 10.1016/j.ahj.2005.02.048-
dc.description.citedreferenceWintersperger B, 2005, EUR RADIOL, V15, P334, DOI 10.1007/s00330-004-2575-y-
dc.description.citedreferenceSigal-Cinqualbre AB, 2004, RADIOLOGY, V231, P169, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2311030191-
dc.description.citedreferenceKalra MK, 2004, RADIOLOGY, V230, P619, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2303021726-
dc.description.citedreferenceJung B, 2003, EUR RADIOL, V13, P2560, DOI 10.1007/s00330-003-2111-5-
dc.description.citedreferenceJakobs TF, 2002, EUR RADIOL, V12, P1081, DOI 10.1007/s00330-001-1278-x-
dc.description.citedreferenceHuda W, 2000, RADIOLOGY, V217, P430-
dc.description.citedreferenceKalender WA, 1999, EUR RADIOL, V9, P323-
dc.description.tc10-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share