Image Quality and Radiation Dose of Pulmonary CT Angiography Performed Using 100 and 120 kVp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to compare image quality and radiation dose of pulmonary CT angiography (CTA) performed in the same patient cohort using tube potentials of 100 and 120 kVp. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study group for this retrospective study was 32 patients (22 women, 10 men) with a mean age of 57 years (age range, 28-83 years; body weight < 100 kg). Patients underwent pulmonary CTA studies performed using 120 and 100 kVp while other scanning parameters were kept constant. Two observers measured image signal and image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and SNR dose and CNR dose. Two additional observers performed qualitative image quality analysis using a 5-point grading scale (5 = excellent). RESULTS: The reduction in tube potential caused image signal to increase by 29% (p < 0.0001), image noise to increase by 68% (p < 0.0001), CNR dose to decrease by 0.8% (p = 0.91) and SNR to decrease by 24% (p = 0.0002) and CNR by 20% (p = 0.0019). Radiation dose (dose-length product) was decreased by 37% to 379.26 mGy × cm at 100 kVp from 604.46 mGy × cm at 120 kVp (p < 0.0001). The median pulmonary arteries image quality scores for observers 1 and 2, respectively, were as follows at 100 kVp: main, 5 and 5; lobar, 5 and 4.5; and segmental, 5 and 4. At 120 kVp, the median image quality scores for observers 1 and 2 were as follows: main, 5 and 5; lobar, 5 and 5; segmental, 4 and 4. A Wilcoxon test analysis indicated no significant difference in image quality between the studies (main, p = 0.59; lobar, p = 0.88; segmental, p = 0.79). CONCLUSION: Pulmonary CTA can be performed using a tube potential of 100 kVp in patients who weigh less than 100 kg (220 lb). Reducing the tube potential from 120 to 100 kVp results in a 37% reduction in radiation dose without a significant impact on diagnostic image quality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".