The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Ct scanners

Manufactured by Philips

CT scanners are medical imaging devices that use X-ray technology to create detailed, cross-sectional images of the body. They capture multiple images from different angles, which are then compiled into a 3D image for analysis by healthcare professionals.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

Lab products found in correlation

6 protocols using ct scanners

1

Chest CT Scanning Protocol for Lung Evaluation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We performed 128 slices of chest CT scans with Incisive Philips CT scanners (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). CT examinations were performed with the patient in the supine position in breath-hold, and inspiration using a standard dose protocol, without contrast intravenous injection. The scanning range was from the apex to the base of the lungs. The tube voltage and the current tube were 120 kV and 100–200 mA (and if applicable, using z-axis tube current modulation), respectively. All data were reconstructed with a 0.6–1.0 mm increment. The matrix was 512 mm × 512 mm. Images were reconstructed using a sharp reconstruction kernel for parenchyma evaluation and hard reconstruction kernel for other lung evaluation. All data were reconstructed with a 0.6–1.0 mm increment. Multiplanar reconstruction was also calculated. Details are provided in previous papers [8 (link),11 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

CT Imaging Protocol for Otosclerosis Diagnosis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The temporal bone CT examination was performed using Philips Healthcare CT scanners, which obtained CT images with the following scanning parameters: 1 s, 90–200 mA, 110–130 kV, matrix of 512 × 512, and a bone window width with a high-resolution bone algorithm between 3500 and 4000 Hounsfield centered at 350–650 Hounsfield, in the absence of intravenous contrast. The screening image set was acquired in the axial plane with a slice thickness of 0.5 mm at 0.5-mm intervals and was reconstructed at R 0.3-mm intervals to obtain overlapping slices. A board-certified clinician who specializes in otorhinolaryngology with more than 20 years of clinical experience confirmed the presence or absence of otosclerosis. Otosclerosis confirmation was performed in all subjects. CT images were loaded into the LabelImg software tool (version 1.8.6). They were annotated with rectangular bounding boxes to extract the ROIs containing the entire ear structure by an otolaryngologist and a fellowship-trained radiologist who had more than 10 years and 5 years of clinical experience, respectively.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Lung Bullae Identification Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The clinical records of selected cases were screened to ensure that no other clinical indication for the CT scans was present, and the medical history confirmed the absence of underlying pulmonary disease. Patient characteristics, including age, sex, and smoking status, were recorded for each subject. Cases were excluded if their medical history was missing, the quality of the CT scan was suboptimal (e.g., due to technical faults, extensive imaging artifacts, atelectasis, or pleural fluid obscuring more than one pulmonary lobe), or if a new pulmonary diagnosis was detected on the CT scan (e.g., previously unknown diseases such as pneumonia, emphysema, or cancer). Bullae were defined according to radiologic standards as thin-walled (<1 mm) cavities (Hansell et al., 2008 (link)). Blebs were grouped in with the bullae as a subgroup of bullae, as blebs could be classified as bullae with a direct connection to pleura. We classified all bullous air-filled anomalies as bullae either in direct contact with the pleura, or as intrapulmonary bullae. The following CT scanners were used: 2008 GE Discovery, 2015 Philips Brilliance iCT 256 slice detector, 2015 Philips Ingenuity 128 slice detector and the 2017 GE revolution scanner. The majority of scans were made using the Philips CT scanners from 2015.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Quantifying Esophageal Varices with CT

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Routine multislice CT scans with an iodinated contrast agent were performed on all patients within a six-month timeframe of EGD. Various models of Philips CT scanners in use by the radiology department of the University Hospital Bonn during the study period were used. Volumetric calculations were conducted using an in-house tool developed in MATLAB v9.6. The tool reconstructed axial, sagittal, and coronal images. Landmarks along the course of esophageal varices were manually determined. Volume was calculated by summing corresponding voxels and multiplying by voxel volume (Figure 1). To assess interrater reliability and retest reliability, a second measurement of a randomly selected subset of ten CT scans was performed at a time interval of over one year.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Pulmonary Embolism Imaging Cohort

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A cohort of 207 patients with confirmed PE was randomly selected from two hospitals in England between 2009 and 2017. Cases were acquired on GE (n = 176), Canon (n = 28), and Philips (n = 3) CT Scanners.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Chest CT Protocol for Lung Imaging

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Chest CT scan was performed with 128 slices using Incisive Philips CT scanners (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). CT examinations were performed with the patient in the supine position in breath-hold, and inspiration using a standard dose protocol, without contrast intravenous injection. The scanning range was from the apex to the base of the lungs. The tube voltage and the current tube were 120 kV and 100–200 mA (and if applicable, using z-axis tube current modulation), respectively. All data were reconstructed with a 0.6–1.0 mm increment. The matrix was 512 mm × 512 mm. Images were reconstructed using a sharp reconstruction kernel for parenchyma evaluation and hard reconstruction kernel for other lung evaluation. All data were reconstructed with a 0.6–1.0 mm increment. Multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) was also obtained.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!