Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Optimization of window settings for standard and advanced virtual monoenergetic imaging in abdominal dual-energy CT angiography
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Optimization of window settings for standard and advanced virtual monoenergetic imaging in abdominal dual-energy CT angiography
Do you wish to request the book?
Optimization of window settings for standard and advanced virtual monoenergetic imaging in abdominal dual-energy CT angiography
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Optimization of window settings for standard and advanced virtual monoenergetic imaging in abdominal dual-energy CT angiography
2017
Overview
Objectives
To determine the optimal window setting for displaying virtual monoenergetic reconstructions of third generation dual-source, dual-energy CT (DECT) angiography of the abdomen.
Methods
Forty-five patients were evaluated with DECT angiography (90/150 kV, 180/90 ref. mAs). Three datasets were reconstructed: standard linear blending (M_0.6), 70 keV traditional virtual monoenergetic (M70), and 40 keV advanced noise-optimized virtual monoenergetic (M40+). The best window setting (width and level,
W/L
) was assessed by two blinded observers and was correlated with aortic attenuation to obtain the Optimized
W/L
setting (O-
W/L
). Subjective image quality was assessed, and vessel diameters were measured to determine any possible influences between different
W/L
settings. Repeated measures of variance were used to evaluate comparison of
W/L
values, image quality, and vessel sizing between M_0.6, M70, and M40+.
Results
The Best
W/L
(B-
W/L
) for M70 and M40+ was 880/280 and 1410/450, respectively. Results from regression analysis inferred an O-
W/L
of 850/270 for M70 and 1350/430 for M40+. Significant differences for
W
and
L
were found between the Best and the Optimized
W/L
for M40+, and between M70 and M40+ for both the Best and Optimized
W
/
L
. No significant differences for vessel measurements were found using the O-
W
/
L
for M40+ compared to the standard M_0.6 (
p
≥ 0.16), and significant differences were observed when using the B-
W
/
L
with M40+ compared to M_0.6 (
p
≤ 0.04).
Conclusion
In order to optimize virtual monoenergetic imaging with both traditional M70 and advanced M40+, adjusting the
W
/
L
settings is necessary. Our results suggest a
W
/
L
setting of 850/270 for M70 and 1350/430 for M40+.
Publisher
Springer US,Springer Nature B.V
