Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical value of ultra-low-dose computed tomography (ULDCT) compared with chest x-ray radiography (CXR) for diagnosing chest pathology.... Show morePurpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical value of ultra-low-dose computed tomography (ULDCT) compared with chest x-ray radiography (CXR) for diagnosing chest pathology. Materials and Methods: A total of 200 patients referred for CXR by outpatient clinics or general practitioners were enrolled prospectively. They underwent CXR (posteroanterior and lateral) and ULDCT (120 kV, 3 mAs) on the same day. In-room time and effective dose were recorded for each examination. Studies were categorized whether they were diagnostic or not, relevant radiologic diagnostic findings were reported, and confidence for diagnosis was recorded by a Likert scale. Differences in diagnostic confidence and effect on management decision were compared. Results: In-room time was <2 minutes for CXR and <3 minutes for ULDCT. Effective dose was 0.040 mSv for CXR and 0.071 mSv for ULDCT. CXR was considered diagnostic in 98% and ULDCT in 100%. The mean perceived confidence for diagnosis was 88 +/- 12% with CXR and 98 +/- 2% with ULDCT (P<0.0001), whereas discrepant findings between CXR and ULDCT were found in 101 of 200 patients. As compared with CXR, ULDCT had added value for management decisions in 40 of 200 patients. Conclusions: ULDCT provided added value to the radiologist by improved perceived confidence with a reduction in false-positive and false-negative CXR investigations that had management implications in 20% of patients. The effective dose of ULDCT will not be a limiting factor for introducing ULDCT of the chest on a broad scale in clinical practice. Show less
