nach oben

Erschienen in:

10.05.2016 | Computed Tomography

Single- and dual-energy CT of the abdomen: comparison of radiation dose and image quality of 2nd and 3rd generation dual-source CT

verfasst von: Julian L. Wichmann, Andrew D. Hardie, U. Joseph Schoepf, Lloyd M. Felmly, Jonathan D. Perry, Akos Varga-Szemes, Stefanie Mangold, Damiano Caruso, Christian Canstein, Thomas J. Vogl, Carlo N. De Cecco

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 2/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To compare single-energy (SECT) and dual-energy (DECT) abdominal CT examinations in matched patient cohorts regarding differences in radiation dose and image quality performed with second- and third-generation dual-source CT (DSCT).

Methods

We retrospectively analysed 200 patients (100 male, 100 female; mean age 61.2 ± 13.5 years, mean body mass index 27.5 ± 3.8 kg/m²) equally divided into four groups matched by gender and body mass index, who had undergone portal venous phase abdominal CT with second-generation (group A, 120-kV-SECT; group B, 80/140-kV-DECT) and third-generation DSCT (group C, 100-kV-SECT; group D, 90/150-kV-DECT). The radiation dose was normalised for 40-cm scan length. Dose-independent figure-of-merit (FOM) contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) were calculated for various organs and vessels. Subjective overall image quality and reader confidence were assessed.

Results

The effective normalised radiation dose was significantly lower (P < 0.001) in groups C (6.2 ± 2.0 mSv) and D (5.3 ± 1.9 mSv, P = 0.103) compared to groups A (8.8 ± 2.3 mSv) and B (9.7 ± 2.4 mSv, P = 0.102). Dose-independent FOM-CNR peaked for liver, kidney, and portal vein measurements (all P ≤ 0.0285) in group D. Subjective image quality and reader confidence were consistently rated as excellent in all groups (all ≥1.53 out of 5).

Conclusions

With both DSCT generations, abdominal DECT can be routinely performed without radiation dose penalty compared to SECT, while third-generation DSCT shows improved dose efficiency.

Key Points

• Dual-source CT (DSCT) allows for single- and dual-energy image acquisition.

• Dual-energy acquisition does not increase the radiation dose in abdominal DSCT.

• Third-generation DSCT shows improved dose efficiency compared to second-generation DSCT.

• Dose-independent figure-of-merit image contrast was highest with third-generation dual-energy DSCT.

• Third-generation DSCT shows improved dose efficiency for SECT and DECT.

Graser A, Johnson TR, Chandarana H, Macari M (2009) Dual energy CT: preliminary observations and potential clinical applications in the abdomen. Eur Radiol 19:13–23CrossRefPubMed

Silva AC, Morse BG, Hara AK, Paden RG, Hongo N, Pavlicek W (2011) Dual-energy (spectral) CT: applications in abdominal imaging. Radiographics 31:1031–1046, discussion 1047-1050CrossRefPubMed

Heye T, Nelson RC, Ho LM, Marin D, Boll DT (2012) Dual-energy CT applications in the abdomen. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:S64–70CrossRefPubMed

Marin D, Boll DT, Mileto A, Nelson RC (2014) State of the art: dual-energy CT of the abdomen. Radiology 271:327–342CrossRefPubMed

Morgan DE (2014) Dual-energy CT of the abdomen. Abdom Imaging 39:108–134CrossRefPubMed

Johnson TR, Krauss B, Sedlmair M et al (2007) Material differentiation by dual energy CT: initial experience. Eur Radiol 17:1510–1517CrossRefPubMed

Joe E, Kim SH, Lee KB et al (2012) Feasibility and accuracy of dual-source dual-energy CT for noninvasive determination of hepatic iron accumulation. Radiology 262:126–135CrossRefPubMed

Luo XF, Xie XQ, Cheng S et al (2015) Dual-energy CT for patients suspected of having liver iron overload: can virtual iron content imaging accurately quantify liver iron content? Radiology 277:95–103CrossRefPubMed

Bauer RW, Schulz JR, Zedler B, Graf TG, Vogl TJ (2010) Compound analysis of gallstones using dual energy computed tomography—results in a phantom model. Eur J Radiol 75:e74–80CrossRefPubMed

10.

Graser A, Johnson TR, Bader M et al (2008) Dual energy CT characterization of urinary calculi: initial in vitro and clinical experience. Investig Radiol 43:112–119CrossRef

11.

Nattenmuller J, Hosch W, Nguyen TT et al (2015) Hypodense liver lesions in patients with hepatic steatosis: do we profit from dual-energy computed tomography? Eur Radiol 25:3567–3576CrossRefPubMed

12.

Mileto A, Sofue K, Marin D (2016) Imaging the renal lesion with dual-energy multidetector CT and multi-energy applications in clinical practice: what can it truly do for you? Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-015-4180-7 PubMed

13.

Mileto A, Nelson RC, Marin D, Roy Choudhury K, Ho LM (2015) Dual-energy multidetector CT for the characterization of incidental adrenal nodules: diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced material density analysis. Radiology 274:445–454CrossRefPubMed

14.

Wichmann JL, Booz C, Wesarg S et al (2014) Dual-energy CT-based phantomless in vivo three-dimensional bone mineral density assessment of the lumbar spine. Radiology 271:778–784CrossRefPubMed

15.

Meinel FG, Bischoff B, Zhang Q, Bamberg F, Reiser MF, Johnson TR (2012) Metal artifact reduction by dual-energy computed tomography using energetic extrapolation: a systematically optimized protocol. Investig Radiol 47:406–414CrossRef

16.

Schabel C, Bongers M, Sedlmair M et al (2014) Assessment of the hepatic veins in poor contrast conditions using dual energy CT: evaluation of a novel monoenergetic extrapolation software algorithm. Röfo 186:591–597PubMed

17.

Mileto A, Ramirez-Giraldo JC, Marin D et al (2014) Nonlinear image blending for dual-energy MDCT of the abdomen: can image quality be preserved if the contrast medium dose is reduced? AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:838–845CrossRefPubMed

18.

De Cecco CN, Darnell A, Macias N et al (2013) Second-generation dual-energy computed tomography of the abdomen: radiation dose comparison with 64- and 128-row single-energy acquisition. J Comput Assist Tomogr 37:543–546CrossRefPubMed

19.

Jepperson MA, Cernigliaro JG, el Ibrahim SH, Morin RL, Haley WE, Thiel DD (2015) In vivo comparison of radiation exposure of dual-energy CT versus low-dose CT versus standard CT for imaging urinary calculi. J Endourol 29:141–146CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

(2007) The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 37:1–332

21.

Christner JA, Kofler JM, McCollough CH (2010) Estimating effective dose for CT using dose-length product compared with using organ doses: consequences of adopting International Commission on Radiological Protection publication 103 or dual-energy scanning. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:881–889CrossRefPubMed

22.

Schindera ST, Nelson RC, Mukundan S Jr et al (2008) Hypervascular liver tumors: low tube voltage, high tube current multi-detector row CT for enhanced detection--phantom study. Radiology 246:125–132CrossRefPubMed

23.

Nakaura T, Awai K, Maruyama N et al (2011) Abdominal dynamic CT in patients with renal dysfunction: contrast agent dose reduction with low tube voltage and high tube current-time product settings at 256-detector row CT. Radiology 261:467–476CrossRefPubMed

24.

Guimaraes LS, Fletcher JG, Harmsen WS et al (2010) Appropriate patient selection at abdominal dual-energy CT using 80 kV: relationship between patient size, image noise, and image quality. Radiology 257:732–742CrossRefPubMed

25.

Primak AN, Giraldo JC, Eusemann CD et al (2010) Dual-source dual-energy CT with additional tin filtration: dose and image quality evaluation in phantoms and in vivo. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:1164–1174CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Purysko AS, Primak AN, Baker ME et al (2014) Comparison of radiation dose and image quality from single-energy and dual-energy CT examinations in the same patients screened for hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Radiol 69:e538–544CrossRefPubMed

27.

Winklehner A, Gordic S, Lauk E et al (2015) Automated attenuation-based tube voltage selection for body CTA: performance evaluation of 192-slice dual-source CT. Eur Radiol 25:2346–2353CrossRefPubMed

28.

Gordic S, Morsbach F, Schmidt B et al (2014) Ultralow-dose chest computed tomography for pulmonary nodule detection: first performance evaluation of single energy scanning with spectral shaping. Investig Radiol 49:465–473CrossRef

29.

Solomon J, Mileto A, Ramirez-Giraldo JC, Samei E (2015) Diagnostic performance of an advanced modeled iterative reconstruction algorithm for low-contrast detectability with a third-generation dual-source multidetector CT scanner: potential for radiation dose reduction in a multireader study. Radiology 275:735–745CrossRefPubMed

30.

Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R et al (2009) Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med 169:2078–2086CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Patient safety: radiation dose in X-ray and CT exams. Available via http://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/safety/?pg=sfty_xray#part3. Accessed 28 April 2015

32.

Mangold S, Thomas C, Fenchel M et al (2012) Virtual nonenhanced dual-energy CT urography with tin-filter technology: determinants of detection of urinary calculi in the renal collecting system. Radiology 264:119–125CrossRefPubMed

33.

De Cecco CN, Darnell A, Macias N et al (2013) Virtual unenhanced images of the abdomen with second-generation dual-source dual-energy computed tomography: image quality and liver lesion detection. Investig Radiol 48:1–9CrossRef

34.

Graser A, Johnson TR, Hecht EM et al (2009) Dual-energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images? Radiology 252:433–440CrossRefPubMed

35.

Krauss B, Grant KL, Schmidt BT, Flohr TG (2015) The importance of spectral separation: an assessment of dual-energy spectral separation for quantitative ability and dose efficiency. Investig Radiol 50:114–118CrossRef

Titel: Single- and dual-energy CT of the abdomen: comparison of radiation dose and image quality of 2nd and 3rd generation dual-source CT
verfasst von: Julian L. Wichmann
Andrew D. Hardie
U. Joseph Schoepf
Lloyd M. Felmly
Jonathan D. Perry
Akos Varga-Szemes
Stefanie Mangold
Damiano Caruso
Christian Canstein
Thomas J. Vogl
Carlo N. De Cecco
Publikationsdatum: 10.05.2016
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Radiology / Ausgabe 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4383-6

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

23.04.2024 | Pankreaskarzinom | Nachrichten

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Single- and dual-energy CT of the abdomen: comparison of radiation dose and image quality of 2nd and 3rd generation dual-source CT

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Update Radiologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2017

Independent value of image fusion in unenhanced breast MRI using diffusion-weighted and morphological T2-weighted images for lesion characterization in patients with recently detected BI-RADS 4/5 x-ray mammography findings

Decreased stage migration rate of early gastric cancer with a new reconstruction algorithm using dual-energy CT images: a preliminary study

The value of qualitative and quantitative assessment of lesion to cerebral cortex signal ratio on double inversion recovery sequence in the differentiation of demyelinating plaques from non-specific T2 hyperintensities

The assessment of local response using magnetic resonance imaging at 3- and 6-month post chemoradiotherapy in patients with anal cancer

One-stop shop assessment for atrial septal defect closure using 256-slice coronary CT angiography

The number of unrecognized myocardial infarction scars detected at DE-MRI increases during a 5-year follow-up

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Update Radiologie