Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Radiol. May 28, 2026; 18(5): 119048
Published online May 28, 2026. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v18.i5.119048
Published online May 28, 2026. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v18.i5.119048
Figure 3 Violin plot comparison of objective image quality parameters between the photon-counting computed tomography and energy-integrating detector computed tomography groups.
A: Signal-to-noise ratio; B: Contrast-to-noise ratio; C: Signal-to-noise ratio/(computed tomography dose index)1/2; D: Contrast-to-noise ratio/(computed tomography dose index)1/2; E: Noise ratio; F: Excellent image index. SNR: Signal-to-noise ratio; CNR: Contrast-to-noise ratio; CDTI: Computed tomography dose index; EID-CT: Energy-integrating detector computed tomography; PCCT: Photon-counting computed tomography; NR: Noise ratio; EII: Excellent image index.
- Citation: Zhu TT, Zhu XY, Yang M, Liu WM, Yang WJ, Liu X. Photon-counting computed tomography enables low-dose, high-quality abdominal imaging: A comparative study with energy-integrating detector computed tomography. World J Radiol 2026; 18(5): 119048
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8470/full/v18/i5/119048.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v18.i5.119048