Revolution Ascend CT Machine

Introducing the Revolution™ Ascend platform- our latest CT offering that is designed for efficiency to match your imaging demands. Whether you require a highly efficient system with 20mm of coverage for routine scanning, or a more advanced system with 40mm of coverage that improves low contrast detectability, you can choose exactly what you need. Since the Revolution Ascend platform is scalable, you can decide which system is right for you today and easily upgrade when you need it in the future.

FOOTNOTES

1. 1. True Enhance DL is 510(k) pending in the U.S. FDA. Not available for sale in the United States.
2. 2. Referred class is identified as CT scanners in the industry that have 38.4-40mm detector coverage with maximum generator power which has a capability from 55 kW to 82 kW, as of July 2021.
3. 3. Patient area defined by circular area between the top of the gantry bore and the center of the tabletop surface at lowest cradle position.
4. 4. The required clicks are defined as clicks required to execute a scan from selecting a new patient until start scan. All associated clicks for and in clinical practice, number of the required clicks may vary depending on the circumstances, including but not limited to, the clinical task, exam type, clinical practice, and image reconstruction technique.
5. 5. In clinical practice, the use of ASiR-V may reduce CT patient dose depending on the clinical task, patient size, anatomical location, and clinical practice. A consultation with a radiologist and physicist should be made to determine the appropriate dose to obtain diagnostic image quality for the particular clinical task. Low Contrast Detectability (LCD), Image Noise, Spacial Resolution and Artifact were assessed using reference factory protocols comparing ASiR-V and FBP. The LCD measured in 0.625mm slices and tested for both head and body modes using the MITA CT IQ Phantom (CCT183, The Phantom Laboratory), using model observer method. AI enabled.
6. 6. The data was based on comparison between GE’s legacy products (16 ch and 64 ch scanner) and Revolution Ascend in the three institutions using a pilot product and selected routine head and body. The data set of this comparison was 838 exams for legacy products and 1387 exams for Revolution Ascend. The time saving value may not be effective for all institutions depending on the clinical practice. Defined the scan setting time is from “Open new patient” to “Confirm setting for Scout”.
7. 7. The data was based on comparison between GE’s legacy products (16 ch and 64 ch scanner) and Revolution Ascend in the three institutions using a pilot product and selected routine head and body. The data set of this comparison was 838 exams for legacy products and 1387 exams for Revolution Ascend. The time saving value may not be effective for all institutions depending on the clinical practice. Definition of entire exam time is from “Open new patient” to “Last primary recon completed” for Revolution Ascend and “Close exam” for legacy products.
8. 8. As demonstrated in a clinical evaluation consisting of 40 cases and 6 physicians, where each case was reconstructed with both DLIR and ASiR-V and evaluated by 3 of the physicians. In 92% of the reads, DLIR’s noise texture was rated better than ASiR-V’s. This rating was based on each individual reader’s preference.
9. 9. Image quality comparisons were evaluated by phantom tests of MTF, SSP, axial NPS, standard deviation of image noise, CT Number accuracy, CNR, and artifact analysis. Additionally, LCD was demonstrated in phantom testing using a model observer with the head and body MITA CT IQ Phantoms (CT191, CT189 The Phantom Laboratory). DLIR-H and ASiR-V reconstructions were performed using the same raw data.
10. 10. Not a consultant for GE HealthCare. The views and opinions expressed are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect the offical policy or position of GE HealthCare. The statements by GE HealthCare's customers here are based on his/her own opinions and on results that were achieved in his/her unique setting. Since there is no "typical" hospital/clinical setting and may variables exist, i.e. hospital size, case mix, staff expertise, etc., there can be no guarantee that others will achieve the same results.