Image quality and dose comparison among screen-film, computed, and CT scanned projection radiography: applications to CT urography.

PURPOSE

To evaluate image quality and dose for abdominal imaging techniques that could be used as part of a computed tomographic (CT) urographic examination: screen-film (S-F) radiography or computed radiography (CR), performed with moving and stationary grids, and CT scanned projection radiography (CT SPR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An image quality phantom underwent imaging with moving and stationary grids with both a clinical S-F combination and CR plate. CT SPR was performed with six CT scanners at various milliampere second and kilovolt peak settings. Entrance skin exposure (ESE); spatial, contrast, and temporal resolutions; geometric accuracy; and artifacts were assessed.

RESULTS

S-F or CR images, with either grid, provided image quality equivalent to that with the clinical standard, S-F with a moving grid. ESE values for both S-F and CR were 435 mR (112.2 microC/kg [1 mR = 0.258 microC/kg]) with a moving grid and 226 mR (58.3 microC/kg) with a stationary grid. All CT SPR images provided inferior spatial resolution compared with S-F or CR images. High-contrast objects generated substantial artifacts on CT SPR images. Compared with S-F, CR and CT SPR provided improved resolution of small low-contrast objects. The contrast between iodine and soft-tissue-mimicking structures on CT SPR images acquired at 80 kVp was twice that at 120 kVp. CT SPR images with acceptable noise levels required a midline ESE value of approximately 300 mR (77.4 microC/kg) at 80 kVp.

CONCLUSION

S-F and CR provided better spatial resolution than did CT SPR. However, CT SPR provided improved low-contrast resolution compared with S-F, at exposures comparable to those used for S-F or CR.