Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparisons of subjective and objective evaluation parameters of small intestinal wall during small intestine stage

From: Efficiency of dual-energy computed tomography enterography in the diagnosis of Crohn’s disease

Group

Objective evaluation parameters

Subjective evaluation parameters

CT value

CNR

SNR

noise*

Overall imaging quality score *

Imaging sharpness score *

40 keV

149.44 ± 45.86a

3.18 ± 1.71a

5.08 ± 2.77a

4.76 ± 0.38a

4.57 ± 0.26b

4.91 ± 0.37a

50 keV

108.24 ± 31.03b

2.91 ± 1.45a

5.06 ± 2.54a

4.53 ± 0.71a

4.64 ± 0.23b

4.84 ± 0..53a

60 keV

83.24 ± 22.45b

2.74 ± 1.24a

4.93 ± 2.46a

4.38 ± 0.59a

4.91 ± 0.61a

4.27 ± 0.97a

70 keV

67.79 ± 17.47c

2.54 ± 1.14b

4.83 ± 2.14b

4.11 ± 0.78b

4.51 ± 0.37b

4.12 ± 0.68b

80 keV

57.59 ± 14.18cd

1.89 ± 1.05c

4.73 ± 2.17b

3.36 ± 0.85c

3.88 ± 0.28c

3.43 ± 0.27c

90 keV

51.15 ± 12.22d

1.52 ± 0.95c

4.52 ± 1.49c

3.17 ± 0.41c

3.73 ± 0.37c

3.06 ± 0.23c

120 kVp

61.18 ± 14.94c

2.74 ± 1.33b

4.55 ± 1.15c

3.96 ± 0.48b

4.13 ± 0.33b

4.28 ± 0.29a

Z/F value

185.041

98.104

82.172

5.164

5.221

5.111

P value

 < 0.001

 < 0.001

 < 0.001

0.627

0.618

0.726

  1. "a, c, b, d" were multiple comparison marks. When marked with the same letter, it meant no significant difference between the two groups. When marked with different letters, it indicates the difference with statistically significant between the two groups. * subjective scores were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. CT: computed tomography; CNR: contrast-to-noise-ratio; SNR: signal-to-noise-ratio