Scholarlink

Introduction <p>We compared image quality of first- and second generation SOMATOM On.site mobile head CT with vendor-matched stationary head CT in neurosurgical ICU patients.</p> Methods <p>Retrospective paired study of 100 ICU patients, 50 mobile CT v1 and 50 mobile CT v2, paired with stationary CT, yielding 200 head CT exams. Four radiologists blinded to image characteristics scored five tasks on a four-point scale: supratentorial cortical and deep image quality, infratentorial image quality and artifact severity. Quantitative metrics were attenuation and noise from four standardized ROIs, and grey-white matter contrast-to-noise ratio.</p> Results <p>MobCT v2 received higher reader scores than paired stationary CT for overall image quality, supratentorial cortical and deep image quality, and equal to stationary CT for infratentorial image quality and artifact severity. Mobile CT v1 was rated lower than paired stationary CT, and lower than mobile CT v2, for all tasks. Attenuation, noise, and CNR were similar across groups. Radiation dose favoured mobile CT v2 with a median Dose Length Product (DLP) of 39.6 mGy·cm compared to 50.1 mGy·cm for mobile CTv1.</p> Conclusion <p>The second generation On.site mobile CT yielded superior image quality versus the first generation and comparable to contemporary stationary CT with similar quantitative metrics. These findings support a broader adoption of point-of-care head CT.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Mobile head CT scanner provides superior image quality compared to conventional stationary CT

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月30日

查看全文
  • Henrik Andersson,
  • Björn M Hansen,
  • Emma Hall,
  • Amir Hillal,
  • Helena Mellander Oxholm,
  • Veronica Fransson,
  • Johan Wassélius

摘要

Introduction

We compared image quality of first- and second generation SOMATOM On.site mobile head CT with vendor-matched stationary head CT in neurosurgical ICU patients.

Methods

Retrospective paired study of 100 ICU patients, 50 mobile CT v1 and 50 mobile CT v2, paired with stationary CT, yielding 200 head CT exams. Four radiologists blinded to image characteristics scored five tasks on a four-point scale: supratentorial cortical and deep image quality, infratentorial image quality and artifact severity. Quantitative metrics were attenuation and noise from four standardized ROIs, and grey-white matter contrast-to-noise ratio.

Results

MobCT v2 received higher reader scores than paired stationary CT for overall image quality, supratentorial cortical and deep image quality, and equal to stationary CT for infratentorial image quality and artifact severity. Mobile CT v1 was rated lower than paired stationary CT, and lower than mobile CT v2, for all tasks. Attenuation, noise, and CNR were similar across groups. Radiation dose favoured mobile CT v2 with a median Dose Length Product (DLP) of 39.6 mGy·cm compared to 50.1 mGy·cm for mobile CTv1.

Conclusion

The second generation On.site mobile CT yielded superior image quality versus the first generation and comparable to contemporary stationary CT with similar quantitative metrics. These findings support a broader adoption of point-of-care head CT.