Superior labral anteroposterior lesions of the shoulder: part 1, anatomy and anatomic variants.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this article are to provide a pictorial review of labral anatomy and physiology, with particular attention to commonly seen anatomic variants and pitfalls, and to present standard imaging techniques and approaches to MRI interpretation to facilitate diagnosis and treatment of superior labral anteroposterior (SLAP) lesions. CONCLUSION: Imaging plays an important role in the diagnosis of SLAP tears. Knowledge of glenolabral anatomy, related structures and variants, proper imaging techniques, and a systematic approach to MRI interpretation is important in the diagnosis and treatment planning of the 10 types of SLAP lesions. Arthroscopy offers a means for definitive diagnosis.

Superior labral anteroposterior lesions of the shoulder: part 2, mechanisms and classification.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this article are to discuss the 10 distinct patterns of superior labral anteroposterior (SLAP) tears to facilitate adequate diagnosis and treatment. Correlations with clinical presentation, mechanism of injury, and treatment will enhance understanding. CONCLUSION: Imaging plays an important role in the diagnosis of SLAP tears. Knowledge of glenolabral anatomy, related structures and variants, proper imaging techniques, and a systematic approach to MRI interpretation is important in the diagnosis and treatment planning of the 10 types of SLAP lesions. Arthroscopy offers a means for definitive diagnosis.

Dose to radiosensitive organs during routine chest CT: effects of tube current modulation.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to estimate the dose to radiosensitive organs (glandular breast and lung) in patients of various sizes undergoing routine chest CT examinations with and without tube current modulation; to quantify the effect of tube current modulation on organ dose; and to investigate the relation between patient size and organ dose to breast and lung resulting from chest CT examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty voxelized models generated from images of patients were extended to include lung contours and were used to represent a cohort of women of various sizes. Monte Carlo simulation-based virtual MDCT scanners had been used in a previous study to estimate breast dose from simulations of a fixed-tube-current and a tube current-modulated chest CT examinations of each patient model. In this study, lung doses were estimated for each simulated examination, and the percentage organ dose reduction attributed to tube current modulation was correlated with patient size for both glandular breast and lung tissues. RESULTS: The average radiation dose to lung tissue from a chest CT scan obtained with fixed tube current was 23 mGy. The use of tube current modulation reduced the lung dose an average of 16%. Reductions in organ dose (up to 56% for lung) due to tube current modulation were more substantial among smaller patients than larger. For some larger patients, use of tube current modulation for chest CT resulted in an increase in organ dose to the lung as high as 33%. For chest CT, lung dose and breast dose estimates had similar correlations with patient size. On average the two organs receive approximately the same dose effects from tube current modulation. CONCLUSION: The dose to radiosensitive organs during fixed-tube-current and tube current-modulated chest CT can be estimated on the basis of patient size. Organ dose generally decreases with the use of tube current-modulated acquisition, but patient size can directly affect the dose reduction achieved.

Monte Carlo simulations to assess the effects of tube current modulation on breast dose for multidetector CT.

Tube current modulation was designed to reduce radiation dose in CT imaging while maintaining overall image quality. This study aims to develop a method for evaluating the effects of tube current modulation (TCM) on organ dose in CT exams of actual patient anatomy. This method was validated by simulating a TCM and a fixed tube current chest CT exam on 30 voxelized patient models and estimating the radiation dose to each patient's glandular breast tissue. This new method for estimating organ dose was compared with other conventional estimates of dose reduction. Thirty detailed voxelized models of patient anatomy were created based on image data from female patients who had previously undergone clinically indicated CT scans including the chest area. As an indicator of patient size, the perimeter of the patient was measured on the image containing at least one nipple using a semi-automated technique. The breasts were contoured on each image set by a radiologist and glandular tissue was semi-automatically segmented from this region. Previously validated Monte Carlo models of two multidetector CT scanners were used, taking into account details about the source spectra, filtration, collimation and geometry of the scanner. TCM data were obtained from each patient's clinical scan and factored into the model to simulate the effects of TCM. For each patient model, two exams were simulated: a fixed tube current chest CT and a tube current modulated chest CT. X-ray photons were transported through the anatomy of the voxelized patient models, and radiation dose was tallied in the glandular breast tissue. The resulting doses from the tube current modulated simulations were compared to the results obtained from simulations performed using a fixed mA value. The average radiation dose to the glandular breast tissue from a fixed tube current scan across all patient models was 19 mGy. The average reduction in breast dose using the tube current modulated scan was 17%. Results were size dependent with smaller patients getting better dose reduction (up to 64% reduction) and larger patients getting a smaller reduction, and in some cases the dose actually increased when using tube current modulation (up to 41% increase). The results indicate that radiation dose to glandular breast tissue generally decreases with the use of tube current modulated CT acquisition, but that patient size (and in some cases patient positioning) may affect dose reduction.