Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 143
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 143
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 209
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3051
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Severity: Warning
Message: Attempt to read property "Count" on bool
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 3053
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3053
Function: _error_handler
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To compare the image quality of low-dose CT (LD-CT) with tin filtration of the lumbar spine after metal implants to standard clinical CT, and to evaluate the potential for metal artifact and dose reduction.
Materials And Methods: CT protocols were optimized in a cadaver torso. Seventy-four prospectively included patients with metallic lumbar implants were scanned with both standard CT (120 kV) and tin-filtered LD-CT (Sn140kV). CT dose parameters and qualitative measures (1 = worst,4 = best) were compared. Quantitative measures included noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and the width and attenuation of the most prominent hypodense metal artifact. Standard CT and LD-CT were assessed for imaging findings.
Results: Tin-filtered LD-CT was performed with 60% dose saving compared to standard CT (median effective dose 3.22 mSv (quartile 1-3: 2.73-3.49 mSv) versus 8.02 mSv (6.42-9.27 mSv; p < .001). Image quality of CT and tin-filtered low-dose CT was good with excellent depiction of anatomy, while image noise was lower for CT and artifacts were weaker for tin-filtered LD-CT. Quantitative measures also revealed increased noise for tin-filtered low-dose CT (41.5HU), lower SNR (2) and CNR (0.6) compared to CT (32HU,3.55,1.03, respectively) (all p < .001). However, tin-filtered LD-CT performed superior regarding the width and attenuation of hypodense metal artifacts (2.9 mm and -767.5HU for LD-CT vs. 4.1 mm and -937HU for CT; all p < .001). No difference between methods was observed in detection of imaging findings.
Conclusion: Tin-filtered LD-CT with 60% dose saving performs comparable to standard CT in detection of pathology and surgery related complications after lumbar spinal instrumentation, and shows superior metal artifact reduction.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10858831 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-023-04467-5 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!