Last year, the X27A beamline at the National Synchrotron Light Source (NSLS) became dedicated solely to X-Ray Computed Microtomography (XCMT). This is a third-generation instrument capable of producing tomographic volumes of 1-2 micron resolution over a 2-3mm field of view. Recent enhancements will be discussed. These have focussed on two issues: the desire for real-time data acquisition and processing and the need for highly monochromatic beam (.1 % energy bandpass). The latter will permit k-edge subtraction studies and will provide improved image contrast from below the Cr (6 keV) up to the Cs (36 keV) k-edge. A range of applications that benefit from these improvements will be discussed as well. These two goals are somewhat counterproductive, however; higher monochromaticity yields a lower flux forcing longer data acquisition times. To balance the two, a more efficient scintillator for X-ray conversion is being developed. Some testing of a prototype scintillator has been performed; preliminary results will be presented here. In the meantime, data reconstruction times have been reduced, and the entire tomographic acquisition, reconstruction and volume rendering process streamlined to make efficient use of synchrotron beam time. A Fast Filtered Back Transform (FFBT) reconstruction program recently developed helped to reduce the time to reconstruct a volume of 150 x 150 x 250 pixels 3 (over 5 million voxels) from the raw camera data to 1.5 minutes on a dual R10,000 CPU. With these improvements, one can now obtain a "quick look" of a small tomographic volume (~l0 6 voxels) in just over 15 minutes from the start of data acquisition.

No abstract

We present a method of estimating effective doses in cardiac CT that accounts for selected techniques (kV mAs(-1)), anatomical location of the scan and patient size. A CT dosimetry spreadsheet (ImPACT CT Patient Dosimetry Calculator) was used to estimate effective doses (E) using ICRP 103 weighting factors for a 70 kg patient undergoing cardiac CT examinations. Using dose length product (DLP) for the same scans, we obtained values of E/DLP for three CT scanners used in cardiac imaging from two vendors. E/DLP ratios were obtained as a function of the anatomical location in the chest and for x-ray tube voltages ranging from 80 to 140 kV. We also computed the ratio of the average absorbed dose in a water cylinder modeling a patient weighing W kg to the corresponding average absorbed dose in a water cylinder equivalent to a 70 kg patient. The average E/DLP for a 16 cm cardiac heart CT scan was 26 microSv (mGy cm)(-1), which is about 70% higher than the current E/DLP values used for chest CT scans (i.e. 14-17 microSv (mGy cm)(-1)). Our cardiac E/DLP ratios are higher because the cardiac region is approximately 30% more radiosensitive than the chest, and use of the ICRP 103 tissue weighting factors increases cardiac CT effective doses by approximately 30%. Increasing the x-ray tube voltage from 80 to 140 kV increases the E/DLP conversion factor for cardiac CT by 17%. For the same incident radiation at 120 kV, doses in 45 kg adults were approximately 22% higher than those in 70 kg adults, whereas doses in 120 kg adults were approximately 28% lower. Accurate estimates of the patient effective dose in cardiac CT should use ICRP 103 tissue weighting factors, and account for a choice of scan techniques (kV mAs(-1)), exposed scan region, as well as patient size.

Purpose: The goal of this study was to estimate organ doses for chest CT examinations using volume computed tomography dose index ͑CTDI vol ͒ data as well as accounting for patient weight. Methods: A CT dosimetry spreadsheet ͑ImPACT CT patient dosimetry calculator͒ was used to compute organ doses for a 70 kg patient undergoing chest CT examinations, as well as volume computed tomography dose index ͑CTDI vol ͒ in a body CT dosimetry phantom at the same CT technique factors. Ratios of organ dose to CTDI vol ͑f organ ͒ were generated as a function of anatomical location in the chest for the breasts, lungs, stomach, red bone marrow, liver, thyroid, liver, and thymus. Values of f organ were obtained for x-ray tube voltages ranging from 80 to 140 kV for 1, 4, 16, and 64 slice CT scanners from two vendors. For constant CT techniques, we computed ratios of dose in water phantoms of differing diameter. By modeling patients of different weights as equivalent water cylinders of different diameters, we generated factors that permit the estimation of the organ doses in patients weighing between 50 and 100 kg who undergo chest CT examinations relative to the corresponding organ doses received by a 70 kg adult. Results: For a 32 cm long CT scan encompassing the complete lungs, values of f organ ranged from 1.7 ͑thymus͒ to 0.3 ͑stomach͒. Organs that are directly in the x-ray beam, and are completely irradiated, generally had f organ values well above 1 ͑i.e., breast, lung, heart, and thymus͒. Organs that are not completely irradiated in a total chest CT scan generally had f organ values that are less than 1 ͑e.g., red bone marrow, liver, and stomach͒. Increasing the x-ray tube voltage from 80 to 140 kV resulted in modest increases in f organ for the heart ͑9%͒ and thymus ͑8%͒, but resulted in larger increases for the breast ͑19%͒ and red bone marrow ͑21%͒. Adult patient chests have been modeled by water cylinders with diameters between ϳ20 cm for a 50 kg patient and ϳ28 cm for a 100 kg patient. At constant x-ray techniques, a 50 kg patient is expected to have doses that are ϳ18% higher than those in a 70 kg adult, whereas a 100 kg patient will have doses that are ϳ18% lower. Conclusions:We describe a practical method to use CTDI data provided by commercial CT scanners to obtain patient and examination specific estimates of organ dose for chest CT examinations.

Our primary objective in this study was to determine the preferred strength setting for the sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction algorithm (SAFIRE) in abdominal computed tomography (CT) imaging. Sixteen consecutive clinical CT scans of the abdomen were reconstructed by use of traditional filtered back projection (FBP) and 5 SAFIRE strengths: S1-S5. Six readers of differing experience were asked to rank the images on preference for overall diagnostic quality. The contrast-to-noise ratio was not significantly different between SAFIRE S1 and FBP, but increased with increasing SAFIRE strength. For pooled data, S2 and S3 were preferred equally but both were preferred over all other reconstructions. S5 was the least preferred, with FBP the next least preferred. This represents a marked disparity between the image quality based on quantitative parameters and qualitative preference. Care should be taken to factor in qualitative in addition to quantitative aspects of image quality when one is optimizing iterative reconstruction images.

No abstract

No abstract

To investigate the relationship between radiographic techniques (i.e. kilovolt and milliampere-second) and the corresponding volume computed tomography dose index (CTDI(vol)). Data were obtained for CTDI(vol) for head and body phantoms from the ImPACT CT patient dosimetry calculator for 43 scanners from four major vendors of medical imaging equipment (i.e. GE, Philips, Siemens and Toshiba). CTDI(vol) were obtained with the largest X-ray beam width, and using a CT pitch of unity. For each scanner, relative values of CTDI(vol) were also computed as a function of X-ray tube voltage, normalised to unity at 120 kV. The average CTDI(vol) for 43 commercial scanners was 167 + or - 44 microGy (mA s)(-1) for the head phantom and 78 + or - 22 microGy (mA s)(-1) for the body phantom. The 90th percentile CTDI(vol) values are approximately twice the corresponding 10th percentile values for both head and body phantoms. Over the last 20 y, the head phantom CTDI(vol) has increased approximately 50 % and the body phantom CTDI(vol) has increased approximately 90 %. For both, the head phantom and the body phantom, CTDI(vol) is proportional to kilovolt(2.6). CT output must be specified using CTDI(vol) because for a fixed kilovolt and milliampere-second, CT scanner outputs (CTDI(vol)) differ by about a factor of 2. Increasing the X-ray tube voltage from 80 to 140 kV increases CTDI(vol) by about a factor of 4.