| PM | Quote | Reply | Full Topic |
| Joined: | Tue Jun 5th, 2012 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
1. The most challenging CT exam is cardiac CTA. Body imaging is less challenging, technically speaking. Therefore, new scanner should excel in cardiac CTA.
2. New coronary artery motion correction schemes seem promising (see: Effect of a novel vendor-specific motion-correction algorithm on image quality and diagnostic accuracy in persons undergoing coronary CT angiography without rate-control medications, by Leipsic et al; J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2012 Apr 6), but at the expense of increased radiation (~13 mSv retrospective vs 1 - 2 mSv prospective). Qualifier: I don't have much faith in the "Linear, no-threshold" hypothesis re radiation safety. Rather, I favor the "radiation hormesis" hypothesis - see author Myron Pollycove. Thus, I view decreased radiation dose in the CT exam as a secondary benefit, not as a primary benefit. This being so, single source CT seems adequate and is cheaper.
3. Want highest spatial resolution possible, to minimize blooming of Ca++ plaques.
4. Dual energy imaging is attractive for possible future Ca++ plaque subtraction. Has many future potential applications in body imaging, also.
5. GE 750 HD Freedom Edition satisfies 1 - 4.
6. My ranking is therefore:
#1 - GE 750 HD Freedom Edition
#2 - GE 750 HD
#3 - Siemens Dual Source
#4 - Toshiba
Is this analysis flawed? Am I overlooking something?
Thank you.
| Close Window |