CT colonography: Determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom

K. T. Johnson, C. D. Johnson, S. M. Anderson, M. R. Bruesewitz, C. H. McCollough

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

22 Scopus citations

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the thickest slice at the lowest radiation dose for detection of colon polyps larger than 5mm in diameter at computed tomographic (CT) colonography. A colon phantom containing haustral folds, flexures, and straight segments was constructed of borosilicate. One hundred forty simulated polyps (5, 7, 10, and 12 mm) of various shapes (sessile, flat, and pedunculated) were attached at different colon locations (wall, base of fold, on the fold and fold tip). Polyps were positioned parallel, perpendicular, and oblique to the CT gantry. The air-filled phantom was scanned at different slice thicknesses (1.25-5 mm) and x-ray tube currents (5-308 mA). All polyps were identified in all data sets except one (1.25 mm slice thickness, 5 mA). In this acquisition, image noise reduced polyp visibility, and five of 140 (3%) polyps could not be identified. Unidentified polyps were 5 mm, flat or sessile in shape, located on the colon wall or base of the fold, and oblique or parallel to CT gantry. All tested CT techniques provided optimal polyp detection except settings at 1.25 mm and 5 mAs. Thin collimation (<5 mm) scans may not be necessary to detect clinically significant polyps.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)173-176
Number of pages4
JournalAbdominal Imaging
Volume29
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2004

Keywords

  • Colon phantom
  • Computed tomographic colonography
  • Computed tomographic technique
  • Low dose
  • Polyps

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology
  • Urology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'CT colonography: Determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this