High-pitch dual-source paranasal sinus CT in agitated patients with maxillofacial trauma: analysis of image quality, motion artifacts, and dose aspects

The ultrafast, high-pitch turbo FLASH mode of third-generation dual-source CT: Effect of different pitch and corresponding SFOV on image quality in a phantom study

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of different pitches and corresponding scan fields of view (SFOVs) on the image quality in the ultrafast, high-pitch turbo FLASH mode of the third-generation dual-source CT using an anthropomorphic phantom.

METHODS

The phantom was scanned using the ultrafast, high-pitch turbo FLASH protocols of the third-generation dual-source CT with the different pitches and corresponding SFOVs (pitches: 1.55 to 3.2 with increments of 0.1, SFOVs: 50 cm to 35.4 cm). The objective parameters such as the CT number, image noises, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and artifacts index (AI), and image features from the head, chest, and abdomen were compared between the CT images with a pitch of 1.55 and SFOV of Ø 50 cm and a pitch of 3.2 and SFOV of Ø 35.4 cm. Then, the 18 series of CT images of the head, chest, and abdomen were evaluated by three radiologists independently.

RESULTS

The differences in the CT numbers were not statically significant between the CT images with a pitch of 1.55 and SFOV of Ø 50 cm and a pitch of 3.2 and SFOV of Ø 35.4 cm from most body parts and potential combinations (p > 0.05), Most of the image noises and the AI from the images with the pitch of 1.55 were significantly lower than those with the pitch of 3.2 (p < 0.05), and the SNR and CNR from the images with the pitch of 1.55 were higher than those with the pitch of 3.2. There were significant differences in the first-order features and texture features of the head (59.3%, 28.3%), chest (66%, 35.7%), and abdomen (71.6%, 64.7%) (p < 0.05). The subjective image quality was excellent when the pitch was less than 2.0 and gradually decreased with the increasing pitch. In addition, the image quality decreased significantly when the pitch was higher than 3.0 (all k≥0.69), especially in the head and chest.

CONCLUSIONS

In the ultrafast, high-pitch turbo FLASH mode of the third-generation DSCT, increasing the pitch and lowering the corresponding SFOV will change the image features and cause more artifacts degrading the image quality. Specific to the clinical needs, decreasing the pitch not only can expand the SFOV but also can improve the image quality.

Facial Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Current Image Acquisition and Processing Techniques

Introduction: Plastic and reconstructive surgery is based on a culmination of technological advances, diverse techniques, creative adaptations and strategic planning. 3D imaging is a modality that encompasses several of these criteria while encouraging the others. Imaging techniques used in facial imaging come in many different modalities and sub-modalities which is imperative for such a complex area of the body; there is a clear clinical need for hyper-specialized practice. However, with this complexity comes variability and thus there will always be an element of bias in the choices made for imaging techniques. Aims and Objectives: The aim of this review is to systematically analyse the imaging techniques used in facial reconstruction and produce a comprehensive summary and comparison of imaging techniques currently available, including both traditional and novel methods. Methods: The systematic search was performed on EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane reviews using keywords such as "image technique/acquisition/processing," "3-Dimensional," "Facial," and "Reconstruction." The PRISMA guidelines were used to carry out the systematic review. Studies were then subsequently collected and collated; followed by a screening and exclusion process with a final full-text review for further clarification in regard to the selection criteria. A risk of bias assessment was also carried out on each study systematically using the respective tool in relation to the study in question. Results: From the initial 6,147 studies, 75 were deemed to fulfill all selection criteria and selected for meta-analysis. The majority of papers involved the use of computer tomography, though the use of magnetic resonance and handheld scanners using sonography have become more common in the field. The studies ranged in patient population, clinical indication. Seminal papers were highlighted within the group of papers for further analysis. Conclusions: There are clearly many factors that affect the choice of image acquisition techniques and their potential at being ideal for a given role. Ultimately the surgical team's choice will guide much of the decision, but it is crucial to be aware of not just the diagnostic ability of such modalities, but their treatment possibilities as well.