4.2 Article

Low-dose computed tomography of the lumbar spine: a phantom study on imaging parameters and image quality

Journal

ACTA RADIOLOGICA
Volume 55, Issue 7, Pages 824-832

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0284185113509615

Keywords

CT; conventional radiography; spine; structures; techniques

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Lumbar spine radiography has limited diagnostic value but low radiation dose compared with computed tomography (CT). The average effective radiation dose from lumbar spine radiography is about 1.1 mSv. Low-dose lumbar spine CT may be an alternative to increase the diagnostic value at low radiation dose, around 1 mSv. Purpose: To determine the optimal settings for low-dose lumbar spine CT simultaneously aiming for the highest diagnostic image quality possible. Material and Methods: An ovine lower thoracic and lumbar spine phantom, with all soft tissues around the vertebrae preserved except the skin, was placed in a 20 L plastic container filled with water. The phantom was scanned repeatedly with various technical settings; different tube potential, reference mAs, and with different convolution filters. Five radiologists evaluated the image quality according to a modification of the European guidelines for multislice computed tomography (MSCT) quality criteria for lumbar spine CT 2004. In a visual comparison the different scans were also ranked subjectively according to perceived image quality. Image noise and contrast were measured. Results: A tube potential of 120 kV with reference mAs 30 and medium or medium smooth convolution filter gave the best image quality at a sub-millisievert dose level, i.e. with an effective dose comparable to that from lumbar spine radiography. Conclusion: Low-dose lumbar spine CT thus opens a possibility to substitute lumbar spine radiography with CT without obvious increase in radiation dose.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available