文章摘要
正弦图确认迭代重建技术在胸部低剂量CT扫描中的应用价值
Application value of SAFIRE technology in the chest low-dose CT scanning
投稿时间：2016-03-10  
DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1000-0399.2017.08.011
中文关键词: 正弦图确认迭代重建  胸部  低剂量  双源CT
英文关键词: Sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE)  Chest  Low dose  Dual source CT
基金项目:
作者单位
邱晓晖 236800 安徽省亳州市人民医院影像中心 
高建磊 236800 安徽省亳州市人民医院影像中心 
章辉庆 236800 安徽省亳州市人民医院影像中心 
摘要点击次数: 1443
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      目的 探讨正弦图确认迭代重建（SAFIRE）技术在胸部低剂量CT扫描中的应用价值。方法 随机选取亳州市人民医院2014年6月至2014年12月有前后2次胸部CT扫描记录的30例患者影像学资料，2次扫描分别为传统的滤波反投影重建（FBP）及SAFIRE技术，SAFIRE强度为Strenth3；统计比较每位患者2次扫描图像的CT值、噪声（SD）、信噪比（SNR）及有效辐射剂量（ED）。结果 两组上肺部（胸大肌）、中肺部（升主动脉根部）及下肺部（椎旁软组织）的CT值分别为：FBP组为（51.19±6.22）HU、（42.87±7.37）HU、（45.84±8.37）HU；SAFIRE组为（53.91±12.89）HU、（42.55±8.20）HU、（44.43±15.47）HU；两组平扫SD分别为：FBP组为（8.65±2.07）HU、（9.19±1.69）HU、（13.27±3.05）HU，SAFIRE组为（18.41±18.00）HU、（19.20±15.71）HU、（29.24±30.09）HU；两组之间差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）；两组的SNR分别为：FBP组为6.31±1.87、4.82±1.06、3.73±1.36，SAFIRE组为4.39±2.20、3.03±1.33、2.45±1.43，两组之间差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；两组的ED值：FBP组为（2.84±0.88）mSv，SAFIRE组为（1.27±0.64）mSv，两组之间差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；两组图像主观评分差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 与传统FBP重建技术相比，SAFIRE重建技术能够在保证图像质量不影响诊断的同时，有效地降低CT辐射剂量，从而保证患者的安全。
英文摘要:
      Objective To explore the application value of SAFIRE technology in the chest low-dose CT scanning. Methods The radiographic data of 30 patients, detected twice by the chest CT scanning in our hospital during Jun 2014 and Dec 2014, were randomly selected, and technology of traditional FBP reconstruction and sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) were used successively in the scanning, with strength of grade 3. The CT value, noise (SD), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and effective dose (ED) of two images was recorded and compared in each patient. Results The CT values of images in these patients with FBP or SAFIRE technology in the upper part (pectoralis major), middle part (ascending aortic root) and lower part (paravertebral soft tissue) of lung were (51.19±6.22) HU vs (53.91±12.89) HU, (42.87±7.37) HU vs (42.55±8.20) HU, (45.84±8.37) HU vs (44.43±15.47) HU, respectively, and the noise SDs between patients with FBP or SAFIRE technology were (8.65±2.07) HU vs (18.41±18.00) HU, (9.19±1.69) HU vs (19.20±15.71) HU, (13.27±3.05) HU vs (29.24±30.09) HU, and differences between them were all of no significance (all P>0.05). But the SNRs between patients with FBP or SAFIRE technology were (6.31±1.87) vs (4.39±2.20), (4.82±1.06) vs (3.03±1.33), (3.73±1.36) vs (2.45±1.43), together with the ED values between them (2.84±0.88) mSv vs (1.27±0.64) mSv, all with statistically significant differences (all P<0.05). There was no difference between patients with FBP or SAFIRE technology in the subjective scoring of image quality. Conclusion Compared with the technology of traditional FBP reconstruction, the SAFIRE technology could ensure the desired image quality for diagnosis, and at the same time, effectively reduce CT radiation dose and give safety to patients.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭