Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Is targeted reconstruction necessary for evaluating contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography using a liquid crystal display monitor?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Radiation Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to examine whether 20-cm field-of-view (FOV) targeted reconstruction (TR) on contrast-enhanced (CE) chest computed tomography (CT) might improve the diagnostic value compared with simple zooming (SZ) from whole-thorax FOV images using a 2 million (2M)-pixel liquid crystal display (LCD) monitor.

Materials and methods

We prospectively evaluated 44 patients. SZ images were magnified from a FOV of 26–34 cm (mean 29.7 cm). Parameters were 512 × 512 matrix and 3 mm thickness and interval. Images were reconstructed using a soft-tissue kernel. Three radiologists evaluated contour, spiculation, notch, pleural tag, invasion, and internal characteristics of the lesions using 5-scale scores. We also performed a phantom study to evaluate the spatial resolution of images.

Results

The diagnostic value of the TR images was similar to that of the SZ images, with the findings identified in 88%–100% of the cases. Artifacts from highdensity structures deteriorated the image quality in six (14%), and the SZ images were judged to be preferable in five of them. In the phantom study, there was little difference in spatial resolution between the two images.

Conclusion

The SZ images from whole-thorax FOV on CE chest CT were similar in quality to TR images using a 2M-pixel LCD monitor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mertelmeier T. Why and how is soft copy reading possible in clinical practice? J Digit Imaging 1999;12:3–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Hooper FJ, Pomerantz S, Dahlke A, Rallis D. Radiologists’ productivity in the interpretation of CT scans: a comparison of PACS with conventional film. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:861–864.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Hooper FJ. Accuracy of interpretation of CT scans: comparing PACS monitor displays and hard copy images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:1407–1410.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bennet WF, Vaswani JA, Mendiola JA, Spigos DG. PACS monitors: an evolution of radiologists’ viewing techniques. J Digit Imaging 2002;15:171–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mathie AG, Strickland NH. Interpretation of CT scans with PACS image display in stack mode. Radiology 1997;203:207–209.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lev MH, Farkes J, Gemmete JJ, Hossaln ST, Hunter GJ, Koroshetz WJ, et al. Acute stroke: improved nonenhanced CT detection-benefits of soft-copy interpretation by using variable window width and center level settings. Radiology 1999;213:150–155.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Promerantz SM, White CS, Krebs TL, Daly B, Sukumar SA, Hooper F, et al. Liver and bone window settings for soft-copy interpretation of chest and abdominal CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:311–314.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoshiyuki Ozawa.

About this article

Cite this article

Ozawa, Y., Hara, M., Oshima, H. et al. Is targeted reconstruction necessary for evaluating contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography using a liquid crystal display monitor?. Radiat Med 26, 474–480 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-008-0260-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-008-0260-9

Key words

Navigation