The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5496-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Evelinda Baerends and Luuk J. Oostveen contributed equally to this work.
To compare contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) and iodine discrimination thresholds on iodine maps derived from dual energy CT (DECT) and subtraction CT (SCT).
A contrast-detail phantom experiment was performed with 2 to 15 mm diameter tubes containing water or iodinated contrast concentrations ranging from 0.5 mg/mL to 20 mg/mL. DECT scans were acquired at 100 kVp and at 140 kVp+Sn filtration. SCT scans were acquired at 100 kVp. Iodine maps were created by material decomposition (DECT) or by subtraction of water scans from iodine scans (SCT). Matched exposure levels varied from 8 to 15 mGy. Iodine discrimination thresholds (Cr) and response times were determined by eight observers.
The adjusted mean CNR was 1.9 times higher for SCT than for DECT. Exposure level had no effect on CNR. All observers discriminated all details ≥10 mm at 12 and 15 mGy. For sub-centimetre details, the lowest calculated Cr was ≤ 0.50 mg/mL for SCT and 0.64 mg/mL for DECT. The smallest detail was discriminated at ≥4.4 mg/mL with SCT and at ≥7.4 mg/mL with DECT. Response times were lower for SCT than DECT.
SCT results in higher CNR and reduced iodine discrimination thresholds compared to DECT for sub-centimetre details.
• Subtraction CT iodine maps exhibit higher CNR than dual-energy iodine maps
• Lower iodine concentrations can be discriminated for sub-cm details with SCT
• Response times are lower using SCT compared to dual-energy CT
ESM 1 (DOCX 285 kb)330_2018_5496_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Paul J, Vogl TJ, Mbalisike EC (2014) Oncological Applications of Dual-Energy Computed Tomography Imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 0:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000133 CrossRef
Lestra T, Mulé S, Millet I et al (2016) Applications of dual energy computed tomography in abdominal imaging. Diagn Interv Imaging 593–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2015.11.018 CrossRef
Mileto A, Marin D, Alfaro-cordoba M et al (2014) Iodine quantification to distinguish clear cell from papillary renal cell carcinoma at dual-energy multidetector CT: a multireader diagnostic performance study. Radiology 273:813–820 CrossRef
Ascenti G, Sofia C, Mazziotti S et al (2016) Dual-energy CT with iodine quantification in distinguishing between bland and neoplastic portal vein thrombosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Radiol 71:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2016.05.002 CrossRef
Uhrig M, Sedlmair M, Schlemmer HP et al (2013) Monitoring targeted therapy using dual-energy CT: semi-automatic RECIST plus supplementary functional information by quantifying iodine uptake of melanoma metastases. Cancer Imaging 13:306–313. https://doi.org/10.1102/1470-7330.2013.0031 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Chandler A, Wei W, Herron DH et al (2011) Semiautomated motion correction of tumors in lung CT-perfusion studies. Acad Radiol 18:286–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2010.10.008 CrossRefPubMed
Fuchs A, Kühl JT, Chen MY et al (2015) Feasibility of coronary calcium and stent image subtraction using 320-detector row CT angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 9:393–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2015.03.016 CrossRefPubMed
Mohr B, Brink M, Oostveen LJ, et al (2016) Lung iodine mapping by subtraction with image registration allowing for tissue sliding. In: Styner MA, Angelini ED (eds) Proc. SPIE, Med. Imaging, Image Process. p 978442
Ichikawa T, Erturk SM, Araki T (2006) Multiphasic contrast-enhanced multidetector-row CT of liver: Contrast-enhancement theory and practical scan protocol with a combination of fixed injection duration and patients’ body-weight-tailored dose of contrast material. Eur J Radiol 58:165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.11.037 CrossRefPubMed
Waaijer A, Prokop M, Velthuis BK, Bakker CJ, de Kort GA, van Leeuwen MS (2007) Circle of Willis at CT angiography: dose reduction and image quality—reduction tube voltage and increasing tube current settings. Radiology 242(3):832–839 CrossRef
Yang CL, O’Neill TR, Kramer GA (2002) Examining item difficulty and response time on perceptual ability test items. J Appl Meas 3:282–299 PubMed
Xu Z, Panjwani SA, Lee CP, et al (2016) Evaluation of body-wise and organ-wise registrations for abdominal organs. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. p 97841O
Hussain FA, Mail N, Shamy AM et al (2016) A qualitative and quantitative analysis of radiation dose and image quality of computed tomography images using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. J Appl Clin Med Phys 17:5903 CrossRef
Krauss B, Grant KL, Schmidt BT, Flohr TG (2015) The Importance of Spectral Separation. Invest Radiol 50:114–118. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000109 CrossRefPubMed
Gordic S, Morsbach F, Schmidt B et al (2014) Ultralow-dose chest computed tomography for pulmonary nodule detection. Invest Radiol 49:465–473. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000037 CrossRefPubMed
- Comparing dual energy CT and subtraction CT on a phantom: which one provides the best contrast in iodine maps for sub-centimetre details?
Luuk J. Oostveen
Casper T. Smit
Frank de Lange
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie
Meistgelesene Bücher aus der Radiologie
Mail Icon II