Stent appearance in a novel silicon-based photon-counting CT prototype: ex vivo phantom study in head-to-head comparison with conventional energy-integrating CT

European Radiology Experimental

Table 3 Quantitative analysis results on diameter measurement accuracy, blooming and inter-stent distinction

		Mean error towards true diameter	Blooming	Inter-stent distinction
150-mm FOV	Si-PCCT	0.17 mm (± 0.16 mm)*	18.3% (± 2.6%)**	80.7% (± 7.6%)**
150-mm FOV	EIDCT	0.59 mm (± 0.26 mm)*	32.4% (± 4.6%)**	49% (± 15.8%)**
50-mm FOV	Si-PCCT	0.21 mm (± 0.26 mm)	15.3% (± 3.3%)**	84% (± 11.8%)*
50-mm FOV	EIDCT	0.26 mm (± 0.19 mm)	28.1% (± 3.7%)**	60.9% (± 8.5%)*

EIDCT Energy-integrating computed tomography, FOV Field-of-view, PCCT Photon-counting computed tomography
^*p < 0.01, **p < 0.001 (two-tailed) when comparing Si-PCCT to EIDCT