Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

View full-text article in PMC

. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jul 1.

Published in final edited form as: Invest Radiol. 2016 Jul;51(7):421–429. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000251

Comparison of contrast to noise ratio (CNR) versus tube-current-time-product (mAs) in each of the 4 phantom sizes between the energy integration detector (EID) images and the low energy threshold (TL) images from the photon counting detector (PCD). (a) 80 kV, (b) 100 kV, (c) 120 kV, (d) 140 kV. The iodine CNR in the PCD(TL) images was consistently greater than the iodine CNR in the EID images. s. adult = small adult, l. adult = large adult.

Comparison of contrast to noise ratio (CNR) versus tube-current-time-product (mAs) in each of the 4 phantom sizes between the energy integration detector (EID) images and the low energy threshold (TL) images from the photon counting detector (PCD). (a) 80 kV, (b) 100 kV, (c) 120 kV, (d) 140 kV. The iodine CNR in the PCD(TL) images was consistently greater than the iodine CNR in the EID images. s. adult = small adult, l. adult = large adult.