+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

A CONSORT-compliant prospective randomized controlled trial: radiation dose reducing in computed tomography using an additional lateral scout view combined with automatic tube current modulation: Phantom and patient study



A CONSORT-compliant prospective randomized controlled trial: radiation dose reducing in computed tomography using an additional lateral scout view combined with automatic tube current modulation: Phantom and patient study



Medicine 96(30): E7324



Radiation exposure has been a hot point in research field of computed tomography (CT). Recently, automated tube current modulation (ATCM) has emerged as an important technique to reduce radiation exposure. Many studies have shown that the difference in scout view would affect modulation. This prospective randomized controlled study is aimed to investigate the impact of an additional lateral scout view on radiation dose and image quality in CT using ACTM. Combined with ATCM (Care Dose 4D) on multidetector CT, 2 thoracic phantom CT image series were acquired in which planning was conducted with either an anteroposterior (AP) or an AP-lateral scout view. Also, 410 patients underwent thoracic CT examinations using Care Dose 4D modulation and were randomized to either a scan planned with an AP-lateral scout or a single AP scout. Effects of the different scout views on applied effective milliampere seconds (mAs), volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose-length-product (DLP) were analyzed. The quality of patient CT images was also assessed. Data were analyzed using independent t tests and linear correlation analysis. Compared with AP groups, the mean CTDIvol (phantom, 0.89 ± 0.08 vs 1.36 ± 0.26 mGy, P < .001; in patients, 1.12 [0.96, 1.34] vs 2.16 [1.66, 2.64] mGy, P < .001) and DLP (in phantom, 26 [23.25, 28] vs 40 [34.25, 48] mGy×cm, P < .001; in patients, 41 [33, 41] vs 77 [60.5, 99.5] mGy×cm, P < .001) were significantly reduced by approximately 50% in AP-lateral scout view group. With the AP-lateral topogram, the radiation dose on different off-center positions was essentially equal (CTDIvol: 0.76-0.99 mGy; DLP: 22-28 mGy×cm effective dose: 0.31-0. 39 mSv). For image quality, contrast-to-noise ratio and signal-to-noise ratio values in the AP group were similar to those of AP-lateral scout view group. AP combined with an additional lateral scout view using ACTM can significantly reduce the radiation dose without compromising image quality in chest screening CT.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 059314222

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 28746180

DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000007324


Related references

Automatic Tube Current Modulation and Tube Voltage Selection in Pediatric Computed Tomography: A Phantom Study on Radiation Dose and Image Quality. Investigative Radiology 54(5): 265-272, 2019

The application of automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) on image quality and radiation dose at abdominal computed tomography (CT): A phantom study. Journal of X-Ray Science and Technology 21(4): 453-464, 2013

New organ-based tube current modulation method to reduce the radiation dose during computed tomography of the head: evaluation of image quality and radiation dose to the eyes in the phantom study. La Radiologia Medica 122(8): 601-608, 2017

Effect of patient size on radiation dose for abdominal MDCT with automatic tube current modulation: phantom study. Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology 190(2): W100-W105, 2008

Do metallic endoprostheses increase radiation dose associated with automatic tube-current modulation in abdominal-pelvic MDCT? A phantom and patient study. Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology 184(2): 491-496, 2005

Dose study of electrocardiogram automatic tube current modulation technology in prospective coronary computed tomography angiography scans of overweight patients. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 9(6): 2384-2388, 2015

Influence of Localizer and Scan Direction on the Dose-Reducing Effect of Automatic Tube Current Modulation in Computed Tomography. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 169(1-4): 136-142, 2016

Comparative Study of Volume Computed Tomography Dose Index and Size-Specific Dose Estimate Head in Computed Tomography Examination for Adult Patients Based on the Mode of Automatic Tube Current Modulation. Medical Science Monitor 25: 71-76, 2019

Effect of automatic tube current modulation on radiation dose and image quality for low tube voltage multidetector row CT angiography: phantom study. Academic Radiology 16(8): 997, 2009

Image noise and radiation dose using an automatic tube current modulation technique at 64-detector computed tomography: effect of off-center patient position, bowtie filter type, and scan projection radiograph. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 33(6): 973-977, 2010

Performance of adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D integrated with automatic tube current modulation in radiation dose and image noise reduction compared with filtered-back projection for 80-kVp abdominal CT: Anthropomorphic phantom and patient study. European Journal of Radiology 85(9): 1666-1672, 2016

Technical Note: Phantom study to evaluate the dose and image quality effects of a computed tomography organ-based tube current modulation technique. Medical Physics 42(11): 6572-6578, 2015

Comparison of image quality and radiation dose between fixed tube current and combined automatic tube current modulation in craniocervical CT angiography. Ajnr. American Journal of Neuroradiology 30(9): 1754-1759, 2009

Comparison of image quality and radiation dose between combined automatic tube current modulation and fixed tube current technique in CT of abdomen and pelvis. Acta Radiologica 52(10): 1101-1106, 2011

Metallic prosthesis: technique to avoid increase in CT radiation dose with automatic tube current modulation in a phantom and patients. Radiology 236(2): 671-675, 2005