| Title |
Impact of an advanced image-based monoenergetic reconstruction algorithm on coronary stent visualization using third generation dual-source dual-energy CT: a phantom study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Radiology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00330-015-3997-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefanie Mangold, Paola M. Cannaó, U. Joseph Schoepf, Julian L. Wichmann, Christian Canstein, Stephen R. Fuller, Giuseppe Muscogiuri, Akos Varga-Szemes, Konstantin Nikolaou, Carlo N. De Cecco |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the impact of an advanced monoenergetic (ME) reconstruction algorithm on CT coronary stent imaging in a phantom model. Three stents with lumen diameters of 2.25, 3.0 and 3.5 mm were examined with a third-generation dual-source dual-energy CT (DECT). Tube potential was set at 90/Sn150 kV for DE and 70, 90 or 120 kV for single-energy (SE) acquisitions and advanced modelled iterative reconstruction was used. Overall, 23 reconstructions were evaluated for each stent including three SE acquisitions and ten advanced and standard ME images with virtual photon energies from 40 to 130 keV, respectively. In-stent luminal diameter was measured and compared to nominal lumen diameter to determine stent lumen visibility. Contrast-to-noise ratio was calculated. Advanced ME reconstructions substantially increased lumen visibility in comparison to SE for stents ≤3 mm. 130 keV images produced the best mean lumen visibility: 86 % for the 2.25 mm stent (82 % for standard ME and 64 % for SE) and 82 % for the 3.0 mm stent (77 % for standard ME and 69 % for SE). Mean DLP for SE 120 kV and DE acquisitions were 114.4 ± 9.8 and 58.9 ± 2.2 mGy × cm, respectively. DECT with advanced ME reconstructions improves the in-lumen visibility of small stents in comparison with standard ME and SE imaging. • An advanced image-based monoenergetic reconstruction algorithm improves lumen visualization in stents ≤3.0 mm. • Application of high keV reconstructions significantly improves in-stent lumen visualization. • DECT acquisition resulted in 49 % radiation dose reduction compared with 120 kV SE. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Czechia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 22% |
| Unknown | 7 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 36% |
| Engineering | 4 | 9% |
| Psychology | 3 | 7% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,293,238
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#3,299
of 4,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,739
of 268,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#40
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,121 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,881 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.