title: How many CT detector rows are necessary to perform adequate three dimensional visualization?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The technical development of computer tomography (CT) imaging has experienced great progress. As consequence, CT data to be used for 3D visualization is not only based on 4 row CTs and 16 row CTs but also on 64 row CTs, respectively. The main goal of this study was to examine whether the increased amount of CT detector rows is correlated with improved quality of the 3D images.
  
  
  METHODS
  All CTs were acquired during routinely performed preoperative evaluation. Overall, there were 12 data sets based on 4 detector row CT, 12 data sets based on 16 detector row CT, and 10 data sets based on 64 detector row CT. Imaging data sets were transferred to the DKFZ Heidelberg using the CHILI teleradiology system. For the analysis all CT scans were examined in a blinded fashion, i.e. both the name of the patient as well as the name of the CT brand were erased. For analysis, the time for segmentation of liver, both portal and hepatic veins as well as the branching depth of portal veins and hepatic veins was recorded automatically. In addition, all results were validated in a blinded fashion based on given quality index.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Segmentation of the liver was performed in significantly shorter time (p<0.01, Kruskal-Wallis test) in the 16 row CT (median 479 s) compared to 4 row CT (median 611 s), and 64 row CT (median 670 s), respectively. The branching depth of the portal vein did not differ significantly among the 3 different data sets (p=0.37, Kruskal-Wallis test). However, the branching depth of the hepatic veins was significantly better (p=0.028, Kruskal-Wallis test) in the 4 row CT and 16 row CT compared to 64 row CT. The grading of the quality index was not statistically different for portal veins and hepatic veins (p=0.80, Kruskal-Wallis test). Even though the total quality index was better for the vessel tree based on 64 row CT data sets (mean scale 2.6) compared to 4 CT row data (mean scale 3.25) and 16 row CT data (mean scale 3.0), these differences did not reach statistical difference (p=0.53, Kruskal-Wallis test).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Even though 3D visualization is useful in operation planning, the quality of the 3D images appears to be not dependent of the number of CT detector rows.
authors: Department of Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Germany. lars.fischer@med.uni-heidelberg.de
authors: Lars
authors: L
authors: Fischer
authors: Ralf
authors: R
authors: Tetzlaff
authors: Max
authors: M
authors: Schöbinger
authors: Boris
authors: B
authors: Radeleff
authors: Thomas
authors: T
authors: Bruckner
authors: H P
authors: HP
authors: Meinzer
authors: M W
authors: MW
authors: Büchler
authors: Peter
authors: P
authors: Schemmer
mesh_terms: D004867:Equipment Design; D019544:Equipment Failure Analysis; D006801:Humans; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional / Q000379:methods*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods*