Figure 7. .

Optimal rendering of mIP by using the soft kernel compared to the lung one. (a) mIP 3.3 mm with lung kernel; (b) mIP 6.5 mm with lung kernel; (c) mIP 3.3 mm with soft kernel; (d) mIP 6.5 mm with soft kernel. Whatever the slab thickness of the mIP post-processing tool, there is a lower image quality by using the lung kernel compared with the soft one. Assessment of GGO and traction bronchiectasis is much better depicted in (c, d). GGO, ground glass opacity; mIP, minimum intensity projection.