TY - JOUR
T1 - Intermanufacturer comparison of dual-energy CT iodine quantification and monochromatic attenuation
T2 - A phantom study
AU - Jacobsen, Megan C.
AU - Schellingerhout, Dawid
AU - Wood, Cayla A.
AU - Tamm, Eric P.
AU - Godoy, Myrna C.
AU - Sun, Jia
AU - Cody, Dianna
N1 - Funding Information:
1From the Department of Imaging Physics (M.C.J., C.A.W., D.D.C.), Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Sections of Neuroradiology (D.S.), Abdominal Imaging (E.P.T.), and Thoracic Imaging (M.C.G.), and Department of Biostatistics (J.S.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030. Received April 17, 2017; revision requested June 6; revision received July 25; accepted September 6; final version accepted September 14. Supported in part by the John S. Dunn, Sr. Distinguished Chair in Diagnostic Imaging at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Address correspondence to M.C.J. (e-mail: mcjacobsen@mdanderson.org).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 RSNA.
PY - 2018/4
Y1 - 2018/4
N2 - Purpose: To determine the accuracy of dual-energy computed tomographic (CT) quantitation in a phantom system comparing fast kilovolt peak-switching, dual-source, split-filter, sequential-scanning, and dual-layer detector systems. Materials and Methods: A large elliptical phantom containing iodine (2, 5, and 15 mg/mL), simulated contrast material-enhanced blood, and soft-Tissue inserts with known elemental compositions was scanned three to five times with seven dual-energy CT systems and a total of 10 kilovolt peak settings. Monochromatic images (50, 70, and 140 keV) and iodine concentration images were created. Mean iodine concentration and monochromatic attenuation for each insert and reconstruction energy level were recorded. Measurement bias was assessed by using the sum of the mean signed errors measured across relevant inserts for each monochromatic energy level and iodine concentration. Iodine and monochromatic errors were assessed by using the root sum of the squared error of all measurements. Results: At least one acquisition paradigm per scanner had iodine biases (range,-2.6 to 1.5 mg/mL) with significant differences from zero. There were no significant differences in iodine error (range, 0.44-1.70 mg/mL) among the top five acquisition paradigms (one fast kilovolt peak switching, three dual source, and one sequential scanning). Monochromatic bias was smallest for 70 keV (-12.7 to 15.8 HU) and largest for 50 keV (-80.6 to 35.2 HU). There were no significant differences in monochromatic error (range, 11.4-52.0 HU) among the top three acquisition paradigms (one dual source and two fast kilovolt peak switching). The lowest accuracy for both measures was with a split-filter system. Conclusion: Iodine and monochromatic accuracy varies among systems, but dual-source and fast kilovolt-switching generally provided the most accurate results in a large phantom.
AB - Purpose: To determine the accuracy of dual-energy computed tomographic (CT) quantitation in a phantom system comparing fast kilovolt peak-switching, dual-source, split-filter, sequential-scanning, and dual-layer detector systems. Materials and Methods: A large elliptical phantom containing iodine (2, 5, and 15 mg/mL), simulated contrast material-enhanced blood, and soft-Tissue inserts with known elemental compositions was scanned three to five times with seven dual-energy CT systems and a total of 10 kilovolt peak settings. Monochromatic images (50, 70, and 140 keV) and iodine concentration images were created. Mean iodine concentration and monochromatic attenuation for each insert and reconstruction energy level were recorded. Measurement bias was assessed by using the sum of the mean signed errors measured across relevant inserts for each monochromatic energy level and iodine concentration. Iodine and monochromatic errors were assessed by using the root sum of the squared error of all measurements. Results: At least one acquisition paradigm per scanner had iodine biases (range,-2.6 to 1.5 mg/mL) with significant differences from zero. There were no significant differences in iodine error (range, 0.44-1.70 mg/mL) among the top five acquisition paradigms (one fast kilovolt peak switching, three dual source, and one sequential scanning). Monochromatic bias was smallest for 70 keV (-12.7 to 15.8 HU) and largest for 50 keV (-80.6 to 35.2 HU). There were no significant differences in monochromatic error (range, 11.4-52.0 HU) among the top three acquisition paradigms (one dual source and two fast kilovolt peak switching). The lowest accuracy for both measures was with a split-filter system. Conclusion: Iodine and monochromatic accuracy varies among systems, but dual-source and fast kilovolt-switching generally provided the most accurate results in a large phantom.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044292694&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044292694&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1148/radiol.2017170896
DO - 10.1148/radiol.2017170896
M3 - Article
C2 - 29185902
AN - SCOPUS:85044292694
SN - 0033-8419
VL - 287
SP - 224
EP - 234
JO - Radiology
JF - Radiology
IS - 1
ER -