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 ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 3/2015

01-03-2015 | Computed Tomography

Interdependencies of acquisition, detection, and reconstruction techniques on the accuracy of iodine quantification in varying patient sizes employing dual-energy CT

Authors: Daniele Marin, Jose J. Pratts-Emanuelli, Achille Mileto, Daniela B. Husarik, Mustafa R. Bashir, Rendon C. Nelson, Daniel T. Boll

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 3/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the impact of patient habitus, acquisition parameters, detector efficiencies, and reconstruction techniques on the accuracy of iodine quantification using dual-source dual-energy CT (DECT).

Materials and methods

Two phantoms simulating small and large patients contained 20 iodine solutions mimicking vascular and parenchymal enhancement from saline isodensity to 400 HU and 30 iodine solutions simulating enhancement of the urinary collecting system from 400 to 2,000 HU. DECT acquisition (80/140 kVp and 100/140 kVp) was performed using two DECT systems equipped with standard and integrated electronics detector technologies. DECT raw datasets were reconstructed using filtered backprojection (FBP), and iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE I/V).

Results

Accuracy for iodine quantification was significantly higher for the small compared to the large phantoms (9.2 % ± 7.5 vs. 24.3 % ± 26.1, P = 0.0001), the integrated compared to the conventional detectors (14.8 % ± 20.6 vs. 18.8 % ± 20.4, respectively; P = 0.006), and SAFIRE V compared to SAFIRE I and FBP reconstructions (15.2 % ± 18.1 vs. 16.1 % ± 17.6 and 18.9 % ± 20.4, respectively; P ≤ 0.003). A significant synergism was observed when the most effective detector and reconstruction techniques were combined with habitus-adapted dual-energy pairs.

Conclusion

In a second-generation dual-source DECT system, the accuracy of iodine quantification can be substantially improved by an optimal choice and combination of acquisition parameters, detector, and reconstruction techniques.

Key Points

• Iodine quantification techniques are not immune to error
• Systematic deviations between the measured and true iodine concentrations exist
• Acquisition parameters, detector efficiencies, and reconstruction techniques impact accuracy of iodine quantification
Literature
1.
Chiro GD, Brooks RA, Kessler RM et al (1979) Tissue signatures with dual-energy computed tomography. Radiology 131:521–523CrossRefPubMed
2.
Cann CE, Gamsu G, Birnberg FA, Webb WR (1982) Quantification of calcium in solitary pulmonary nodules using single- and dual-energy CT. Radiology 145:493–496CrossRefPubMed
3.
Genant HK, Boyd D (1977) Quantitative bone mineral analysis using dual energy computed tomography. Invest Radiol 12:545–551CrossRefPubMed
4.
Schmidt-Bindert G, Henzler T, Chu TQ et al (2012) Functional imaging of lung cancer using dual energy CT: how does iodine related attenuation correlate with standardized uptake value of 18FDG-PET-CT? Eur Radiol 22:93–103CrossRef
5.
Apfaltrer P, Meyer M, Meier C et al (2012) Contrast-enhanced dual-energy CT of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Is iodine-related attenuation a potential indicator of tumor response? Invest Radiol 47:65–70CrossRefPubMed
6.
Ascenti G, Mileto A, Krauss B et al (2013) Distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal masses with dual-source dual-energy CT: iodine quantification versus standard enhancement measurements. Eur Radiol 23:2288–2295CrossRefPubMed
7.
Chandarana H, Megibow AJ, Cohen BA et al (2011) Iodine quantification with dual-energy CT: phantom study and preliminary experience with renal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:W693–W700CrossRefPubMed
8.
Koonce JD, Vliegenthart R, Schoepf UJ et al (2014) Accuracy of dual-energy computed tomography for the measurement of iodine concentration using cardiac CT protocols: validation in a phantom model. Eur Radiol 24:512–518CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
9.
Feuerlein S, Heye TJ, Bashir MR, Boll DT (2012) Iodine quantification using dual-energy multidetector computed tomography imaging: phantom study assessing the impact of iterative reconstruction schemes and patient habitus on accuracy. Invest Radiol 47:656–661CrossRefPubMed
10.
11.
Duan X, Wang J, Leng S, Schmidt B, Allmendinger T, Grant K, Flohr T, McCollough CH (2013) Electronic noise in CT detectors: Impact on image noise and artifacts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 201:W626–632CrossRefPubMed
12.
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 195:1164–1174CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
13.
Pontana F, Pagniez J, Duhamel A et al (2013) Reduced-dose low-voltage chest CT angiography with sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction versus standard-dose filtered back projection. Radiology 267:609–618CrossRefPubMed
14.
Li Y, Shi G, Wang S, Wang S, Wu R (2013) Iodine quantification with dual-energy CT: phantom study and preliminary experience with VX2 residual tumour in rabbits after radiofrequency ablation. Br J Radiol 86:20130143CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
15.
Morsbach F, Bickelhaupt S, Rätzer S, Schmidt B, Alkadhi H (2014) Integrated circuit detector technology in abdominal CT: added value in obese patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:368–374CrossRefPubMed
16.
Primak AN, Ramirez Giraldo JC, Liu X, Yu L, McCollough CH (2009) Improved dual-energy material discrimination for dual-source CT by means of additional spectral filtration. Med Phys 36:1359–1369CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
17.
18.
Yu L, Leng S, McCollough CH (2012) Dual-energy CT-based monochromatic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:S9–S15CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Interdependencies of acquisition, detection, and reconstruction techniques on the accuracy of iodine quantification in varying patient sizes employing dual-energy CT
Authors
Daniele Marin
Jose J. Pratts-Emanuelli
Achille Mileto
Daniela B. Husarik
Mustafa R. Bashir
Rendon C. Nelson
Daniel T. Boll
Publication date
01-03-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3447-8

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

European Radiology 3/2015 Go to the issue

Head and Neck

Two-dimensional shear wave elastography as promising diagnostic tool for predicting malignant thyroid nodules: a prospective single-centre experience

Oncology

The application of Gadopentate-Dimeneglumin has no impact on progression free and overall survival as well as renal function in patients with monoclonal plasma cell disorders if general precautions are taken

Cardiac

Anatomical criteria of malignancy by computed tomography angiography in patients with anomalous coronary arteries with an interarterial course

Musculoskeletal

An update on risk factors for cartilage loss in knee osteoarthritis assessed using MRI-based semiquantitative grading methods

Breast

Dixon imaging-based partial volume correction improves quantification of choline detected by breast 3D-MRSI

Neuro

Internal structures of the globus pallidus in patients with Parkinson’s disease: evaluation with quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM)