THE ROLE OF MULTISPIRAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN CLINICAL DIAGNOSIS AND ITS DIAGNOSTIC ADVANTAGES COMPARED WITH MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
Keywords:
Keywords: multispiral computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, radiological diagnostics, 128-slice tomography, 256-slice tomography, clinical diagnostics.Abstract
Resume: This article examines the role of multispiral computed tomography (MSCT) in clinical diagnostics and its diagnostic advantages compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The technical capabilities of modern 128- and 256-slice tomographic systems, including their high spatial resolution, rapid scanning capability, and wide anatomical coverage, are analyzed. The study also reviews the results of scientific research regarding the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy of MSCT and MRI technologies. The findings demonstrate that MSCT is highly effective in detecting bone structures, vascular pathologies, traumatic injuries, and emergency conditions. The high speed of examination and superior spatial resolution make this technique particularly valuable in emergency medicine. In conclusion, modern 128- and 256-slice MSCT systems are widely used as effective diagnostic tools for the detection of cardiovascular diseases, oncological pathologies, neurological disorders, and traumatic injuries.
References
1. Smith J., Lee K., Patel A. Advances in multidetector computed tomography in clinical practice. Radiology. 2019;293(3):634–645.
2. Johnson P.T., Fishman E.K. Multidetector CT technology: current status and emerging developments. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2018;211(5):W203–W212.
3. Rubin G.D., Leipsic J., Joseph Schoepf U. Coronary CT angiography using 128-slice multidetector CT scanners. Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. 2017;11(2):150–159.
4. Sun Z., Ng C.K.C. Multislice CT angiography in cardiovascular disease: technical developments and clinical applications. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology. 2020;26(3):203–211.
5. Hausleiter J., Meyer T., Hadamitzky M. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography. Circulation. 2017;135(9):843–854.
6. Newhouse J.H., Hounsfield G.N. Advances in CT imaging technology: 128- and 256-slice scanners. Radiologic Clinics of North America. 2021;59(2):181–196.
7. Kalender W.A. X-ray computed tomography. Physics in Medicine and Biology. 2019;64(10):1–37.
8. Leipsic J., Abbara S., Achenbach S. SCCT guidelines for coronary CT angiography acquisition and interpretation. Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. 2016;10(6):435–449.
9. McCollough C.H., Leng S., Yu L. Dual-source and multidetector CT: technological advances and radiation dose optimization. Radiology. 2018;276(3):637–653.
10. O’Connor O.J., McSweeney S.E., McWilliams S. Role of multidetector CT in trauma imaging. Emergency Radiology. 2019;26(4):347–356.
11. Kwee T.C., Kwee R.M. Whole-body MRI versus CT in oncology imaging: a systematic review. European Radiology. 2020;30(5):2864–2875.
12. Goo H.W. CT radiation dose optimization in pediatric imaging. Korean Journal of Radiology. 2021;22(3):360–370.
13. Achenbach S., Marwan M., Ropers D. Coronary CT angiography with a 256-slice CT scanner. European Heart Journal. 2017;38(7):478–486.
14. Dewey M., Rief M., Martus P. Evaluation of coronary artery disease using 256-slice CT scanners. European Radiology. 2018;28(6):2465–2475.
15. Schoepf U.J., Nagpal P., Pannu H.K. Multidetector CT in thoracic imaging. Journal of Thoracic Imaging. 2020;35(2):W1–W13.
16. Bae K.T. Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: considerations and approaches. Radiology. 2019;292(3):644–655.
