正弦图确定迭代重建技术在CT尿路造影中的应用  

The application of using sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction in the urinary tract

作　　者：张同旺[1] 张俊[1] 

机构地区：[1]江苏省泰州市人民医院医学影像科,江苏泰州225300

出　　处：《医学影像学杂志》2016年第10期1862-1866,共5页Journal of Medical Imaging

摘　　要：目的与传统滤过反投影(FBP)重建比较,评价双源CT低管电压下结合基于原始数据的正弦图确定迭代重建技术(sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction,SAFIRE)在CT尿路造影中的应用价值。方法收集有泌尿系临床症状的患者90例,体重指数处于正常范围内(男性:20kg/m2≤BMI<25kg/m2,女性:19kg/m2≤BMI<24kg/m2),延迟期扫描随机分为3组。A组:管电压120k V,CARE k V设置为"Semi"及开启全自动动态实时射线剂量调控技术(CARE Dose 4D)(参考电压120k V、参考电流250m As),采用FBP重建;B组:管电压100k V,CARE k V设置为"Semi"及开启CARE Dose 4D(参考电压120k V、参考电流250m As);C组:管电压80k V,CARE k V设置为"Semi"及开启CARE Dose 4D(参考电压120k V、参考电流250m As),B组和C组采用SAFIRE重建,每组30例。对三组的图像质量、平均CT值、图像噪声、对比噪声比及辐射剂量进行对比分析。结果三组的图像噪声分别为9.32±1.72、10.13±1.77、10.63±1.87,差异无统计学意义(F值=1.342,P=0.325)。三组的对比噪声比分别为73.52±6.56、72.15±6.33、71.59±6.21,差异无统计学意义(F值=1.673,P=0.512)。在主观评价中,C组对泌尿系统结构的显示效果略低于A组和B组,但差异无明显统计学意义(X^2值=0.743,P=0.451)。三组辐射剂量依次平均为(6.52±1.13)m Sv、(4.80±0.76)m Sv、(2.42±0.61)m Sv,D组辐射剂量最低,差异具有统计学意义(F值=2.447,P=0.000)。结论采用低管电压并CARE k V半自动模式(Semi)扫描,同时结合SAFIRE技术,可在保证图像质量的同时显著降低辐射剂量。Objective To investigate the effects of sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction （SAFIRE） on application value in Dual-source CT urography comparing with regular filtered back projection （FBP）. Methods Collecting 90 cases of patients with urinary tract symptoms, with a normal BMI （ male ： 20 kg/m^2 ≤BMI 〈 25 kg/m^2, female ： 19 kg/m^2 ≤BMI 〈 24 kg/m^2 ）, delay scan randomly divided into 3 groups. Patients in group A（n = 30） underwent 120 kV scanning with CARE kV（semi） com- bined CARE Dose 4D techniques（ Ref. kV = 120, Quality ref. mAs/rot = 250）, they were rebuilt with FBP. Patients in group B （n = 30） underwent 100 kV scanning with CARE kV（semi） combined CARE Dose 4D techniques （Ref. kV = 120, Quality ref. mAs/rot = 250）. Patients in group C（n = 30） underwent 80 kV scanning with CARE kV（semi） combined CARE Dose4D techniques （Ref. kV = 120, Quality ref. mAs/rot = 250）. Group B and C were rebuilt with SAFIRE. The difference between three groups in image quality, mean CT values, images noise, Contrast-to-noise ratio （CNR） and radiation dose were compared. Resuits The image noise in group A, B and C were （9.32 ±1.72）, （ 10.13 ±1.77） and （ 10.63 ±1.87）, there was no statistical difference between the there groups （ F = 1. 342, P = 0. 325 ）. The CNR in group A, B and C were （73.52 ±6.56） , （72. 15 ±6.33） and （71.59 ± 6.21 ）, there was no statistical difference between the there groups （ F = 1. 673, P = 0.512）. The mean image quality scores in group C was slightly lower than group A and C, but there was no statistical difference between the there groups （χ^2 = 0. 743, P = 0.451 ）. The effective radiation dose in three groups were （6.52 ±1.13） mSv, （4.80 ± 0. 76） mSv, （2.42 ±0.61 ） mSv. The effective radiation dose in group C was the minimum, the difference was statistically significant （ F = 2. 447, P = 0.000）. Conclusion Using low tube voltage and CARE kV（Semi） combined CARE Dose4D techni

关 键 词：体层摄影术 X线计算机 尿路造影 辐射剂量 迭代重建 

分 类 号：R814.42[医药卫生—影像医学与核医学] R695[医药卫生—放射医学]