Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 4/2015

Open Access 01-04-2015 | Contrast Media

Contrast agent and radiation dose reduction in abdominal CT by a combination of low tube voltage and advanced image reconstruction algorithms

Authors: Nico Buls, Gert Van Gompel, Toon Van Cauteren, Koenraad Nieboer, Inneke Willekens, Guy Verfaillie, Paul Evans, Sven Macholl, Ben Newton, Johan de Mey

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 4/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To assess image quality in abdominal CT at low tube voltage combined with two types of iterative reconstruction (IR) at four reduced contrast agent dose levels.

Methods

Minipigs were scanned with standard 320 mg I/mL contrast concentration at 120 kVp, and with reduced formulations of 120, 170, 220 and 270 mg I/mL at 80 kVp with IR. Image quality was assessed by CT value, dose normalized contrast and signal to noise ratio (CNRD and SNRD) in the arterial and venous phases. Qualitative analysis was included by expert reading.

Results

Protocols with 170 mg I/mL or higher showed equal or superior CT values: aorta (278–468 HU versus 314 HU); portal vein (205–273 HU versus 208 HU); liver parenchyma (122–146 HU versus 115 HU). In the aorta, all 170 mg I/mL protocols or higher yielded equal or superior CNRD (15.0–28.0 versus 13.7). In liver parenchyma, all study protocols resulted in higher SNRDs. Radiation dose could be reduced from standard CTDIvol = 7.8 mGy (6.2 mSv) to 7.6 mGy (5.2 mSv) with 170 mg I/mL.

Conclusion

Combining 80 kVp with IR allows at least a 47 % contrast agent dose reduction and 16 % radiation dose reduction for images of comparable quality.

Key Points

• There is a balance between image quality, contrast dose and radiation dose.
• Iterative reconstruction has a major, positive impact on this balance.
• Both contrast dose and radiation dose can be reduced in abdominal CT.
• The trade-off can be quantitatively described by a 3D model.
• Contrast and radiation dose can be tailored according to specific safety concerns.
Literature
1.
Bae KT (2010) Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: considerations and approaches. Radiology 256:32–61CrossRefPubMed
2.
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
3.
Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y et al (2005) Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology 237:945–951CrossRefPubMed
4.
Waaijer A, Prokop M, Velthuis BK et al (2007) Circle of Willis at CT angiography: dose reduction and image quality—reducing tube voltage and increasing tube current settings. Radiology 242:832–839CrossRefPubMed
5.
Marin D, Nelson RC, Barnhart H et al (2010) Detection of pancreatic tumors, image quality, and radiation dose during the pancreatic parenchymal phase: effect of a low‐tube‐voltage, high‐tube‐current CT technique–preliminary results. Radiology 256:450–459CrossRefPubMed
6.
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
7.
Sigal‐Cinqualbre AB, Hennequin R, Abada HT, Chen X, Paul JF (2004) Low‐kilovoltage multi‐detector row chest CT in adults: feasibility and effect on image quality and iodine dose. Radiology 231:169–174CrossRefPubMed
8.
Hunsaker AR, Oliva IB, Cai T et al (2010) Contrast opacification using a reduced volume of iodinated contrast material and low peak kilovoltage in pulmonary CT angiography: objective and subjective evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:W118–W124CrossRefPubMed
9.
Nakaura T, Nakamura S, Maruyama N et al (2012) Low contrast agent and radiation dose protocol for hepatic dynamic CT of thin adults at 256‐detector row CT: effect of low tube voltage and hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm on image quality. Radiology 264:445–454CrossRefPubMed
10.
Utsunomiya D, Oda S, Funama Y et al (2010) Comparison of standard‐ and low‐tube voltage MDCT angiography in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Eur Radiol 20:2758–2765CrossRefPubMed
11.
Cho ES, Chung TS, Oh DK, Choi HS, Suh SH, Lee HK et al (2012) Cerebral computed tomography angiography using a low tube voltage (80 kVp) and a moderate concentration of iodine contrast material: a quantitative and qualitative comparison with conventional computed tomography angiography. Invest Radiol 47:142–147CrossRefPubMed
12.
Papadakis AE, Perisinakis K, Raissaki M, Damilakis J (2013) Effect of x-ray tube parameters and iodine concentration on image quality and radiation dose in cerebral pediatric and adult CT angiography: a phantom study. Invest Radiol 48:192–199PubMed
13.
Szucs-Farkas Z, Verdun FR, von Allmen G, Mini RL, Vock P (2008) Effect of X-ray tube parameters, iodine concentration, and patient size on image quality in pulmonary computed tomography angiography: a chest-phantom-study. Invest Radiol 43:374–381CrossRefPubMed
14.
Kalra MK, Woisetschläger M, Dahlström N et al (2012) Radiation dose reduction with sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction technique for abdominal computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 36:339–346CrossRefPubMed
15.
Willemink MJ, Leiner T, de Jong PA, de Heer LM, Nievelstein RA, Schilham AM et al (2013) Iterative reconstruction techniques for computed tomography part 2: initial results in dose reduction and image quality. Eur Radiol 23:1632–1642CrossRefPubMed
16.
Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, Kujak JL, Lawder HJ, Pavlicek W (2009) Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:764–771CrossRefPubMed
17.
Marin D, Nelson RC, Schindera ST, Richard S, Youngblood RS, Yoshizumi TT et al (2010) Low‐tube‐voltage, high‐tube‐current multidetector abdominal CT: improved image quality and decreased radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm–initial clinical experience. Radiology 254:145–153CrossRefPubMed
18.
Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, Licato PE, Do S, Pien HH et al (2010) Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 257:373–383CrossRefPubMed
19.
Katsura M, Matsuda I, Akahane M et al (2013) Model-based iterative reconstruction technique for ultralow-dose chest CT: comparison of pulmonary nodule detectability with the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol 48:206–212PubMed
20.
McLaughlin PD, Murphy KP, Hayes SA et al (2014) Non-contrast CT at comparable dose to an abdominal radiograph in patients with acute renal colic; impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality and diagnostic performance. Insights Imaging 5:217–230CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
21.
Flicek KT, Hara AK, Silva AC, Wu Q, Peter MB, Johnson CD (2010) Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a pilot study. Am J Roentgenol 195:126–131CrossRef
22.
Cacak R, Gray J, Hangartner T, Hendrick R, Rossi R (1993) Specification and acceptance testing of computed tomography scanners. Report of AAPM Task Group 39. American Association of Physicists in Medicine, College Park
23.
Boone J, Strauss K, Cody D et al (2011) Size‐specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. Report of AAPM Task Group 204. American Association of Physicists in Medicine, College Park
24.
Vollmar SV, Kalender WA (2009) Reduction of dose to the female breast as a result of spectral optimization for high‐contrast thoracic CT imaging: a phantom study. Br J Radiol 82:920–929CrossRefPubMed
25.
Miéville FA, Gudinchet F, Brunelle F, Bochud FO, Verdun FR (2013) Iterative reconstruction methods in two different MDCT scanners: physical metrics and 4‐alternative forced‐choice detectability experiments‐a phantom approach. Phys Med 29:99–110CrossRefPubMed
26.
International Commission on Radiological Protection (2007) 2007 Recommendations of the ICRP. ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP 37(2–4)
27.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography – an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357:2277–2284CrossRefPubMed
28.
Mathews J, Forsythe AV, Brady Z et al (2013) Cancer risk in 680 000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ 346:f2360CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
29.
Yamashita Y, Komohara Y, Takahashi M et al (2000) Abdominal helical CT: evaluation of optimal doses of intravenous contrast material—a prospective randomized study. Radiology 216:718–723CrossRefPubMed
30.
Suzuki H, Oshima H, Shiraki N, Ikeya C, Shibamoto Y (2004) Comparison of two contrast materials with different iodine concentrations in enhancing the density of the aorta, portal vein and liver at multi‐detector row CT: a randomized study. Eur Radiol 14:2099–2104CrossRefPubMed
31.
Heiken JP, Brink JA, McClennan BL, Sagel SS, Crowe TM, Gaines MV (1995) Dynamic incremental CT: effect of volume and concentration of contrast material and patient weight on hepatic enhancement. Radiology 195:353–357CrossRefPubMed
32.
Behrendt FF, Pietsch H, Jost G et al (2010) Intra‐individual comparison of different contrast media concentrations (300 mg, 370 mg and 400 mg iodine) in MDCT. Eur Radiol 20:1644–1650CrossRefPubMed
33.
Swindle MM, Smith AC, Laber‐Laird K, Dungan L (1994) Swine in biomedical research: mamagement and models. ILAR J 36:1–5CrossRef
34.
Brady SL, Yee BS, Kaufman RA (2012) Characterization of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm for dose reduction in CT: a pediatric oncology perspective. Med Phys 39:5520–5531CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Contrast agent and radiation dose reduction in abdominal CT by a combination of low tube voltage and advanced image reconstruction algorithms
Authors
Nico Buls
Gert Van Gompel
Toon Van Cauteren
Koenraad Nieboer
Inneke Willekens
Guy Verfaillie
Paul Evans
Sven Macholl
Ben Newton
Johan de Mey
Publication date
01-04-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 4/2015
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3510-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2015

European Radiology 4/2015 Go to the issue

Oncology

The Histogram Analysis of Diffusion-Weighted Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) Imaging for Differentiating the Gleason grade of Prostate Cancer

Neuro

3D MR Sequence Capable of Simultaneous Image Acquisitions with and without Blood Vessel Suppression: Utility in Diagnosing Brain Metastases

Computed Tomography

Comparison of diagnostic performance between single- and multiphasic contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic computed tomography in patients admitted to the emergency department with abdominal pain: potential radiation dose reduction

Breast

A 16-channel MR coil for simultaneous PET/MR imaging in breast cancer

Interventional

Radiofrequency ablation of chondroblastoma: long-term clinical and imaging outcomes

Physics

Abdominal CT during pregnancy: a phantom study on the effect of patient centring on conceptus radiation dose and image quality