Journals / Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology / 2020 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 2

Compatibility of true and virtual unenhanced attenuation in rapid kV-switching dual energy CT

Pages
95–100
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CONCLUSION rsDECT-based virtual unenhanced images do not seem to be an ideal surrogate for true unenhanced images.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:PURPOSE We aimed to evaluate whether virtual unenhanced images generated from nephrographic phase on rapid kV-switching dual energy computed tomography (rsDECT) can replace true unenhanced images by comparing attenuation values of various intraabdominal structures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS In this retrospective study, 142 patients had unenhanced and nephrographic phase DECT images.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION rsDECT-based virtual unenhanced images do not seem to be an ideal surrogate for true unenhanced images.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

PURPOSE We aimed to evaluate whether virtual unenhanced images generated from nephrographic phase on rapid kV-switching dual energy computed tomography (rsDECT) can replace true unenhanced images by comparing attenuation values of various intraabdominal structures. METHODS In this retrospective study, 142 patients had unenhanced and nephrographic phase DECT images. Attenuation values of the aorta, liver, spleen, pancreas, bilateral renal parenchyma, inferior vena cava, gallbladder and paraspinal muscle on true and virtual unenhanced images were recorded. Frequency of organs that had more than 10 and 20 HU of attenuation difference were also calculated. RESULTS A total of 1224 regions of interest were sampled. No statistically significant differences were found between true and virtual unenhanced attenuation of the aorta, spleen and pancreas. The other structures had significant differences (P < 0.001). Correlation between measurements were weak to moderate (r, 0.17–0.72). Of the organs, 20% had more than 10 HU difference and 5% had more than 20 HU difference between true and virtual unenhanced images. CONCLUSION rsDECT-based virtual unenhanced images do not seem to be an ideal surrogate for true unenhanced images.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇAMLIDAĞ, İ. (2020). Compatibility of true and virtual unenhanced attenuation in rapid kV-switching dual energy CT. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 2, 95–100. https://ajindex.com/articles/150349

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Yeh BM, Shepherd JA, Wang ZJ, Teh HS, Hartman RP, Prevrhal S. Dual-energy and low-kVp CT in the abdomen. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193:47–54. [CrossRef] 2. Marin D, Boll DT, Mileto A, Nelson RC. State of the art: dual-energy CT of the abdomen. Radiology 2014; 271:327–342. [CrossRef] 3. McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, Fletcher JG. Dualand multi-energy CT: principles, technical approaches, and clinical applications. Radiology 2015; 276:637–653. [CrossRef] 4. Morgan DE. Dual-energy CT of the abdomen. Abdom Imaging 2014; 39:108–134. [CrossRef] 5. De Cecco CN, Darnell A, Macias N, et al. Virtual unenhanced images of the abdomen with second-generation dual-source dual-energy computed tomography: image quality and liver lesion detection. Invest Radiol 2013; 48:1–9. [CrossRef] 6. Graser A, Johnson TR, Hecht EM, et al. Dual-energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images? Radiology 2009; 252:433–440. [CrossRef] 7. Haji-Momenian S, Parkinson W, Khati N, Brindle K, Earls J, Zeman RK. Single-energy non-contrast hepatic steatosis criteria applied to virtual non-contrast images: is it still highly specific and positively predictive? Clin Radiol 2018; 73:594.e7–e15. [CrossRef] 8. Kaufmann S, Sauter A, Spira D, et al. Tin-filter enhanced dual-energy-CT: image quality and accuracy of CT numbers in virtual noncontrast imaging. Acad Radiol 2013; 20:596–603. [CrossRef] 9. Lin YM, Chiou YY, Wu MH, Huang SS, Shen SH. Attenuation values of renal parenchyma in virtual noncontrast images acquired from multiphase renal dual-energy CT: Comparison with standard noncontrast CT. Eur J Radiol 2018; 101:103–110. [CrossRef] 10. Sahni VA, Shinagare AB, Silverman SG. Virtual unenhanced CT images acquired from dual-energy CT urography: accuracy of attenuation values and variation with contrast material phase. Clin Radiol 2013; 68:264–271. [CrossRef] 11. Toepker M, Moritz T, Krauss B, et al. Virtual non-contrast in second-generation, dual-energy computed tomography: reliability of attenuation values. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81:e398–405. [CrossRef] 12. Ananthakrishnan L, Rajiah P, Ahn R, et al. Spectral detector CT-derived virtual non-contrast images: comparison of attenuation values with unenhanced CT. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42:702–709. [CrossRef] 13. Sauter AP, Muenzel D, Dangelmaier J, et al. Dual-layer spectral computed tomography: Virtual non-contrast in comparison to true non-contrast images. Eur J Radiol 2018; 104:108–11