中国现代医生
中國現代醫生
중국현대의생
CHINA MODERN DOCTOR
2014年
14期
56-58
,共3页
64排MDCT%采集方式%CT剂量指数%有效剂量
64排MDCT%採集方式%CT劑量指數%有效劑量
64배MDCT%채집방식%CT제량지수%유효제량
64-MDCT%Acquisition pattern%CT dose index%Effective dose
目的：分析比较腰椎64排螺旋CT在三种采集模式设置下的扫描剂量大小，确定腰椎64排螺旋CT的最佳采集模式。方法以水模模拟人体腰椎进行64排螺旋CT扫描，设定3组采集模式：A组（128×0.625）mm、B组（48×0.625）mm、C组（40×0.625）mm。每组采集模式对水模进行40次CT扫描，记录每次扫描的容积剂量指数，计算其剂量长度乘积和有效剂量，使用单因素方差分析进行多个均数比较。结果三组容积剂量指数、剂量长度乘积、有效剂量的比较均为A组（128×0.625 mm）>B组（48×0.625 mm）>C组（40×0.625 mm）；C组有效剂量比A和B组平均容积剂量的分别降低17.45%、10.32%。结论腰椎64排MDCT检查时以40×0.625 mm模式进行扫描辐射剂量最小。
目的：分析比較腰椎64排螺鏇CT在三種採集模式設置下的掃描劑量大小，確定腰椎64排螺鏇CT的最佳採集模式。方法以水模模擬人體腰椎進行64排螺鏇CT掃描，設定3組採集模式：A組（128×0.625）mm、B組（48×0.625）mm、C組（40×0.625）mm。每組採集模式對水模進行40次CT掃描，記錄每次掃描的容積劑量指數，計算其劑量長度乘積和有效劑量，使用單因素方差分析進行多箇均數比較。結果三組容積劑量指數、劑量長度乘積、有效劑量的比較均為A組（128×0.625 mm）>B組（48×0.625 mm）>C組（40×0.625 mm）；C組有效劑量比A和B組平均容積劑量的分彆降低17.45%、10.32%。結論腰椎64排MDCT檢查時以40×0.625 mm模式進行掃描輻射劑量最小。
목적：분석비교요추64배라선CT재삼충채집모식설치하적소묘제량대소，학정요추64배라선CT적최가채집모식。방법이수모모의인체요추진행64배라선CT소묘，설정3조채집모식：A조（128×0.625）mm、B조（48×0.625）mm、C조（40×0.625）mm。매조채집모식대수모진행40차CT소묘，기록매차소묘적용적제량지수，계산기제량장도승적화유효제량，사용단인소방차분석진행다개균수비교。결과삼조용적제량지수、제량장도승적、유효제량적비교균위A조（128×0.625 mm）>B조（48×0.625 mm）>C조（40×0.625 mm）；C조유효제량비A화B조평균용적제량적분별강저17.45%、10.32%。결론요추64배MDCT검사시이40×0.625 mm모식진행소묘복사제량최소。
Objective Compared the scan doses of the 64 multidetector CT (64-MDCT) in three different lumbar ac-quisition patterns, to determine the optimized one. Methods The water phantom was scanned by the 64-MDCT, and three groups were divided according to acquisition patterns: group A (128 ×0.625 mm), group B (48 ×0.625 mm), and group C (40×0.625 mm). For every group, the water phantom was scanned for 40 times. The volume of CT dose index (CTDIvol), the DLP and the effective dose were calculated and recorded. One-way ANOVA test was used to compare mean values. Results According to the values of CTDIvol, DLP, and effective dose, the three groups were ordered as follows, group A (128×0.625mm)>group B (48×0.625mm)>group C (40×0.625mm). In group C, the values of effective dose were reduced 17.45%and 10.32%, respectively, in comparison with that in group A and group B. Conclusion The 40×0.625 mm is the optimized pattern which had minimum radiation dose.
