Advanced

AJNR - American Journal of Neuroradiology

Published ahead of print on April 15, 2009
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A1560

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Supplemental Online Table All Versions of this Article: ajnr.A1560v1 30/7/1419    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Majdani, O. Articles by Heidrich, G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Majdani, O. Articles by Heidrich, G.

American Journal of Neuroradiology 30:1419-1424, August 2009
© 2009 American Society of Neuroradiology

HEAD & NECK

Temporal Bone Imaging: Comparison of Flat Panel Volume CT and Multisection CT

O. Majdani^a, K. Thews^a, S. Bartling^b, M. Leinung^a, C. Dalchow^c, R. Labadie^d, T. Lenarz^a and G. Heidrich^e

^a Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
^b Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Centre, Heidelberg, Germany
^c Department of Otolaryngology, Park Klinik Weissensee, Berlin, Germany
^d Department of Otolaryngology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn
^e Department of Radiology, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Germany

Please address correspondence to Omid Majdani, MD, PhD, Hannover Medical School, Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Carl-Neuberg-Str 1, OE 6500, 30625 Hannover, Germany; e-mail: majdani.omid{at}mh-hannover.de

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A recent development in radiology is the use of flat panel detectors in CT to obtain higher-resolution images. This technique is known as flat panel volume CT (fpVCT). We sought to compare the image quality and diagnostic value of 2 different flat panel detector–equipped scanners: one is a prototype fpVCT scanner, and the other is a so-called flat panel digital volume tomography (fpDVT) scanner, which is routinely used in clinical setup with current state-of-the-art multisection CT (MSCT) scanners.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five explanted temporal bones and 2 whole-head cadaveric specimens were scanned with fpVCT, fpDVT, and MSCT scanners. The image series were blindly evaluated by 3 trained observers who rated 38 anatomic structures with regard to their delineation/appearance.

RESULTS: Although the image quality obtained with fpVCT and fpDVT was rated significantly better compared with MSCT on isolated temporal bones, the differences were not significant when whole cadaveric heads were scanned.

CONCLUSIONS: Theoretic and practical advantages exist for flat panel detector–equipped scanners, including improved image quality. However, when imaging whole cadaveric heads, no significant difference could be demonstrated between them and standard-of-care MSCT.