The detection of liver (hepatic carcinoma) image protocol using 64MDCT The effect of contrast injection technique patient size and low dose parameters on the image quality

The use of 64-MDCT and its effects on liver detection Introduction The proposal is to help in the detection of liver (hepatic carcinoma) image protocol by use of 64-MDCT. The strategies for radiation dose reduction and parameters to be used. In addition, the reducing of the dose radiation and providing for image quality in liver pathology. The advancement of technology has provided for better image quality protocols in liver detection, (Blake, 2008). Literature reviewThe relationship between patient dose and image quality is significant in liver detection. The image quality in CT is greater than that needed for diagnostic confidence. This is what CT operators, medical physicists, and radiologist should get in the use of 4-MDCT. The use of CT in detection of the liver has been there for several years. Parameters that control radiation calculation are many. For example, the default solutions, and iteration parameters, are used in most problems.The process of detection using the 64-MDCT requires patients that have lesions that are surgically proven. These patients then will have to undergo through the triple phase 64-MDCT process. The patients will be observed independently. Later, a thorough evaluation of MR and CT imaging process is required. This is done on a lesion-by-lesion point. According to Hayat (2009), the reproductively, negative and positive values and sensitivity are then evaluated. The diagnostic accuracy of the method is assessed against the alternative free response characteristics analysis.ObjectivesThe main objective of the project is to develop a simple methodology. This is where users can establish exposure factors that can be practical to patients. This includes the patients with different body weights. The method is used instead of, relying on the current approach of using default values based upon standard sized patient.MethodologyThey developed a simple mAs prediction equation to optimize radiation dose for all patient weight categories. The results showed that patient weight can be a good predictor of required dose. In addition, an agreement can be reached, at a certain noise level, to be acceptable. Moreover, the value could be increased for larger patients.The radiation dose reduction requires the lowering of kV or mA settings, Schoenberg (2007). This will, however, increase the noise when all other settings are kept constant. The mA settings are adjusted continuously until the best results are achieved. The reduction of tube voltage is done. This is a strategy of reducing the dose as the image quality is improved. The attenuation of calcium and iodine levels is increased at lower kV. This leads to higher contrasts. In addition, the window width is adjusted. This helps in accommodating the increased contrast enhancement.The application of CT protocol is hindered by the use of excessive radiation and large amounts of contrast medium. However, this technology provides for scanning of the chest. Kalra (2008) notes, the ECG triggers in less than a second with minimum radiation dose. In addition, the ECG triggered a fast CT scanning. This gives a significant role in screening the whole of vasculature of patients.The reduction of dose in protocols for boy CT is also significant. This reduction of dose to patients can be done by performing enhanced phases where needed. The reduction of radiation dose requires a combination of adequate bolus timing, fast scanning, and administration of high Iodine rate. This optimizes the arterial phase MDCT (Rodés, 2007).ConclusionTo conclude, the 64-MDCT, has improved the transverse images and improved the confidence of the reader in the detection of HCC. This is by not increasing the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and, positive predictable value. However, the development is with the cost of a longer period of interpretation. MDCT use of ionizing radiation that induces the risk of secondary cancer is a drawback.ReferencesBlake, Michael A. Imaging in oncology, Volume 3. GX: Springer, 2008.Hayat, M. A. Methods of Cancer Diagnosis, Therapy, and Prognosis: Liver Cancer. GX: Springer, 2009.Kalra, M. K. Mdct: From Protocols to Practice. GX: Springer, 2008.Rodés, Joan. Sections 1 – 10 and index, Volume 1. New Delhi: John Wiley amp. Sons, 2007.Sanjay Saini, Geoffrey D. Rubin, Mannudeep K. Kalra. MDCT: a practical approach. GX: Springer, 2006.Schoenberg, Stefan O. Parallel Imaging in Clinical MR Applications. GX: Springer, 2007.

You Might Also Like