Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Objective image quality evaluation of lower extremity CTA.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 1.

Lower extremity CTA using 120-year-old man with PAD.

A, curved planar reformatted image and B–D, maximum intensity projection images. The image quality was visually classified as score 4 (excellent) in the aortoiliac (B), femoropopliteal (C) and lower leg segments (D).

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Figure 2.

Lower extremity CTA using 70-year-old man with PAD.

A, curved planar reformatted image and B–D, maximum intensity projection images. The image quality was visually classified as score 4 (excellent) in the aortoiliac (B), femoropopliteal (C) and lower leg segments (D).

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Figure 3.

Lower extremity CTA using 70-year-old woman with tumor.

A, curved planar reformatted image and B–D, maximum intensity projection images. The image quality was visually classified as score 3 (good) in the aortoiliac (B), femoropopliteal (C) and lower leg segments (D). Note abnormal hypervascular mass (myxofibrosarcoma) in the left thigh (arrow in panels B and C).

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Figure 4.

Lower extremity CTA using 120-year-old man with PAD.

A, curved planar reformatted image and B–D, maximum intensity projection images. The image quality was visually classified as score 3 (good) in the aortoiliac (a) and femoropopliteal (b) and score 2 (adequate) in the lower leg segments (c) because of poor visualization. Note extensive calcification of bilateral arteries of low extremity.

More »

Figure 4 Expand

Table 2.

Subjective image quality scores of three arterial segments of the lower extremities.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Radiation dose comparison of two lower extremity CTA protocols.

More »

Table 3 Expand