Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
February 2005
Report 05012
32 to 64 slice CT scanner
comparison report version 12
The MHRA DES does not have access to any information held by the Agency in its
capacity as the Competent Authority for the UK, apart from any information already in
the public domain. The reports will contain data given by the manufacturer on the
regulatory status of their devices but, apart from this, they are not an indicator of the
regulatory status of a product. Occasionally, DES refers products to the regulatory
arm of the MHRA for considerations of breaches of the legislation governing medical
devices. DES plays no further part in any regulatory investigation that ensues and
does not have advance notification of any regulatory action that may follow.
MHRA
Orders Department,
Room 1207,
Hannibal House,
Elephant & Castle,
London,
SE1 6TQ.
Colour reports.
Full colour versions of all reports published after 2002 are available from the Internet
at www.medical-devices.gov.uk.
32 to 64 slice CT scanner
comparison report version 12
ImPACT
Bence Jones Offices
St George’s Hospital
London SW17 0QT
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism, or review, as
permitted under the Copyright, Designs & Patents Act, 1998, this publication may only be reproduced,
stored, or transmitted in any form or by any means with the prior permission, in writing, of the
Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (HMSO).
Information on reproduction outside these terms can be found on the HMSO website
(www.hmso.gov.uk) or e-mail: hmsolicensing@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk.
Introduction 5
Purpose of this report .............................................................................5
Comparison method ...............................................................................5
Specification comparison........................................................................5
Scanners covered in this report ..............................................................6
Table 1: Scanners covered in this report ................................................6
Specification comparison 7
Table 2: Scanner gantry .........................................................................7
Table 3: Couch .......................................................................................8
Table 4: X-ray generator.........................................................................8
Table 5: X-ray tube .................................................................................9
Table 6: Detection system ......................................................................9
Table 7: System start-up and calibration ..............................................10
Table 8: Scan parameters ....................................................................10
Table 9: Helical scanning......................................................................11
Table 10: Scan projection radiography (SPR) ......................................12
Table 11: Manufacturers' performance data .........................................12
Table 12: Factors affecting image quality .............................................13
Table 13: Operator's console................................................................14
Table 14: Main computer ......................................................................14
Table 15: Image storage.......................................................................15
Table 16: Image reconstruction on main console .................................16
Table 17: 3D reconstruction display......................................................16
Report 05012 32 to 64 slice CT scanner comparison report version 12
4
Introduction
ImPACT have produced comparison reports for each phase of the purchase
program. The primary aim of these reports is to aid the equipment selection process
by providing comparisons of CT scanners that are currently on the market.
This report is for phase 7 of the Cancer Plan funding. There are separate reports for
six to ten, sixteen, and 32 to 64 slice CT scanners, as well as a report on wide bore
systems.
The scope of this report is limited to CT scanners that are capable of acquiring
between 32 and 64 sets of attenuation data per tube rotation.
Comparison method
The data given in this report are representative of the scanners as of February 2005,
and are liable to change as the performance of individual scanner models is changed
and upgraded. In particular, optional features such as workstations and software
packages may be listed as standard for the scanner replacement programme, but
may not be included in other, separate scanner purchases.
Report 05012 32 to 64 slice CT scanner comparison report version 12
There are two main areas for comparison of the scanners: performance and
specification. None of the scanners in this report have, at the time of publication of
this report, been tested by ImPACT, so the scope of this report is restricted to a
comparison of system specifications.
Specification comparison
The specification comparison is presented as a side-by-side summary comparison of
the specification of each scanner, workstation and related equipment. It is grouped
into a series of sub-sections relating to different aspects of the scanner, such as
gantry, tube and detectors etc. Manufacturers supplied the specification data in
response to a template issued by ImPACT. The data has not been verified by
ImPACT.
5
Introduction
banks, covering 40 mm along the z-axis. The fastest rotation time available is 0.4 s.
The Philips Brilliance CT 64 Power comes with 64 x 0.625 mm detectors, allowing
40 mm z-axis coverage with 0.625 mm slices, and features a maximum rotation
speed of 0.4 s.
The Siemens Somatom Sensation 64 has 32 x 0.6 mm and 8 x 1.2 mm detector
rows. Using their z-Sharp technology the 0.6 mm detectors are double sampled
along the z-axis, resulting in 64 interleaved 0.6 mm data channels. The standard
maximum gantry rotation speed is 0.37 s, but there is an option to upgrade this to
0.33 s.
The Toshiba Aquilion 32 and 64 are based on the same hardware. The systems have
64 x 0.5 mm detector banks, and a maximum rotation speed of 0.4 s.
6
Specification comparison
In order to limit the number of columns in the following comparison scanners with
similar specifications have been listed together. Where differences exist, square
brackets are used to denote the specification of the second system. This is the case
for the following systems:
• GE LightSpeed Pro32 and LightSpeed VCT, where the VCT specifications are
shown in square brackets.
• Philips Brilliance CT 40 Power and 64 Power models, where the 64-slice
system is in brackets.
• Toshiba Aquilion 32 and 64 systems, where the 64-slice specifications are in
brackets.
option)
Tilt range (degrees) ± 30 ± 30 ± 30 ± 30
Type of positioning lights Laser Laser Laser Laser
±1
± 0.5 at centre of
Accuracy of positioning lights (mm) at any laser to ±1 ±1
gantry
patient distance
7
Specification comparison
Table 3: Couch
Philips Brilliance Toshiba
GE LightSpeed Pro Siemens Sensation
CT 40 Aquilion 32
32 [VCT] 64
[64] [Aquilion 64]
Couch top material Carbon fibre Carbon fibre Carbon fibre Carbon fibre
285 x 45 (or 42 just 243 x 41 243 x 40 219 (std) or
Couch top length and width (cm)
for cradle) (just for cradle) (just for cradle) 189 (short) x 47
219 (std)
Horizontal movement range (cm) 200 200 200
189 (short)
Accuracy/reproducibility of table
± 0.25 ± 0.25 ± 0.25 ± 0.25
positioning (mm)
Scannable horizontal range without table 200 (Axial), 187 180 (std)
162 157
top extension (cm) (Helical & Scout) 150 (short)
Scannable horizontal range with table top 170 (Axial), 160 180 (std)
192 157
extension(s) (cm) (Helical & Scout) 150 (short)
Vertical movement range out of gantry
43 - 99 52-104 53 - 102 31 - 95.4
(cm)
8
Specification comparison
Automatically
Settings at which focal spot changes
Info. not available Info. not available selected dependent Info. not available
from small to large
on scan protocols
Method of cooling Oil to air Oil to air Oil to air Oil to forced air
1 year unlimited 1 year unlimited 1 year unlimited
Guaranteed tube life 300,000 rotations
guarantee guarantee guarantee
9
Specification comparison
0.3*, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.22* (option), 0.25*, (0.25* , 0.4 option)
Scan times for axial scans (s) 0.3*,0.4 0.5, 0.75,
0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1, 2 0.33*, 0.33 (option), 0.32*, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0,
* = Partial scans 1, 1.5, 2
(360° rotation) 0.37, 0.5, 0.67*, 1.0 1.5, 2.0, 3.0
kV settings available 80, 100, 120, 140 90, 120, 140 80, 100, 120, 140 80, 100, 120, 135
10 - 50
10 - 800 30 - 500 28 - 580 (5mA steps)
mA Range and Step size
(5mA steps) (1mA steps) (1mA steps) 50 - 500
(10mA steps)
10
Specification comparison
quality
SureView, AMPR
Cobra -
GE Proprietary 3D cone-beam artefact
Helical interpolation algorithms available Cone Beam TCOT and MUSCOT
algorithms reduction and z-
Reconstruction
sharp technology
11
Specification comparison
Air: ± 10
CT number accuracy (HU) Water : ± 3 ±4 Water: ± 3
Water: ± 4
120kV, 20 x 1.2mm
CTDI settings for std head 120kVp, 20 mm 120kV, 40 mm 120kV, 4 x 4 mm
(24 x 1.2 - 2005)
12
Specification comparison
Adaptive image
Low signal enhancement or Yes
Adaptive filtration for noise reduction Yes (automatic)
correction smoothing for three (quantum denoising)
density ranges
Modified beam
Iterative Bone hardening Beam hardening
Option (IBO), (abdomen, pelvis, correction
Iterative bone
Motion correction shoulder), Motion Raster Art.
correction, COBRA
Reconstruction of correction Suppression
Artefact reduction algorithms cone beam
thick slices from (sequential modes), Protocol (RASP)
reconstruction,
thinner ones to Posterior Fossa Stack scanning
Report 05012 32 to 64 slice CT scanner comparison report version 12
combined slice
reduce partial optimisation, z- Automatic patient
volume effects Sharp motion correction
Reconstruction
13
Specification comparison
14
Specification comparison
MOD (option)
MOD (images) &
MOD and CD writer MOD and CD writer DVD-RAM
Archive options DVD (scan data,
(standard) (standard) DICOM Media CD-
protocols) (standard)
ROM
Immediate
5-6 in background Approx 30
Time to mount an archive disk or tape (s) (disk continually less than 20
operation for full disk
accessible)
Archive data transfer rate 1 (read)
>1 2-3 background task
(images / s) 0.7 (write)
Report 05012 32 to 64 slice CT scanner comparison report version 12
15
Specification comparison
MC-option
MC-standard MC-standard MC-standard
3D Volume rendering software WS-standard
WS-standard WS-standard WS-standard
(Volume Rendering)
MC-option
MC-standard MC-standard MC-option
3D Virtual endoscopy WS-standard
WS-standard WS-standard WS-standard
(Navigator)
MC-standard
MC-standard MC-standard MC-standard
MPR (Multi-planar reconstruction) WS-standard
WS-standard WS-standard WS-standard
(MPR & MPVR)
Axial, sagittal,
All planes, any
Axial, para-axial, Axial, sagittal, coronal, oblique,
oblique (identical on
Planes available in MPR sagittal, coronal, coronal, oblique, curved with cross
console and
oblique, curvilinear curvilinear cut through the
workstations)
curved reformat
16
Specification comparison
Coherence
MC-Not available
MC-option Dosimetrist MC-Not available
Radiotherapy CT simulation software WS-option
WS-option (separate WS-option
(CT sim)
workstation)
MC-option
MC-option MC-option WS-option
Prospective ECG-triggered cardiac MC-option
WS-option (Prospective Gating) (post-processing
software WS-option
(SmartScore) WS-Not available only)
(HeartView CS)
MC-option MC-option
MC/WS-option MC-option
Retrospective ECG-gated cardiac (Snapshot) WS-option (post-
(Retrospective WS-option
software MC+WS-option processing only)
Tagging) (Prospective Gating)
(Cardiac Imaging) (HeartView CI)
MC-option
MC-option MC-option
WS-option MC-option
CT Perfusion software WS-option WS-option
(head + body WS-Not available
(CT Perfusion) (Perfusion CT)
perfusion)
17
Specification comparison
Environmental requirements (max/min 18-26 ºC, 30-60% 15-24 °C, 20-75% 15-28 ºC, 15-75% 18-28 ºC, 40-80%
temperature, humidity) in scanner room relative humidity relative humidity relative humidity relative humidity
18
Specification comparison
19
Appendix 1: ImPACT and the MHRA
Background
One of the roles of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
(MHRA) is to fund evaluation programmes for medical devices and equipment. The
programme includes evaluation of x-ray Computed Tomography Equipment currently
available on the UK market.
MHRA aims to ensure that evaluation techniques keep abreast of improvements in
CT imaging performance and that MHRA reports present evaluation information that
is timely, useful and readily understood.
ImPACT
ImPACT (Imaging Performance Assessment of Computed Tomography) is the
MHRA's CT evaluation facility. It is based at St George's Hospital, London, part of St
George's Healthcare NHS Trust.
ImPACT have developed test objects and measurement procedures suitable for
inter-comparing CT scanner performance. For each CT evaluation hundreds of
images are obtained from the system under test and subsequently analysed using
custom written software. Dose measurements are made using ion chambers, and x-
ray film is used to obtain additional x-ray dose information.
The ImPACT team is available to answer any queries with regard to the details of this
report, and also to offer general technical and user advice on CT purchasing,
acceptance testing and quality assurance.
ImPACT
Bence Jones Offices
St George’s Hospital
London SW17 0QT
T: +44 (0) 20 8725 3366
F: +44 (0) 20 8725 3969
E: impact@impactscan.org
W: www.impactscan.org
20