Head and Neck Single- and Dual-energy CT: Differences in Radiation Dose and Image Quality of 2nd and 3rd Generation Dual-source CT

Overview

Journal Br J Radiol

Publisher Oxford University Press

Specialty Radiology

Date 2021 Apr 29

PMID 33914613

Citations 3

Authors

Lukas Lenga

Marvin Lange

Simon S Martin

Moritz H Albrecht

Christian Booz

Ibrahim Yel

Christophe T Arendt

Thomas J Vogl

Doris Leithner

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare radiation dose and image quality of single-energy (SECT) and dual-energy (DECT) head and neck CT examinations performed with second- and third-generation dual-source CT (DSCT) in matched patient cohorts.

Methods: 200 patients (mean age 55.1 ± 16.9 years) who underwent venous phase head and neck CT with a vendor-preset protocol were retrospectively divided into four equal groups ( = 50) matched by gender and BMI: second (Group A, SECT, 100-kV; Group B, DECT, 80/Sn140-kV), and third-generation DSCT (Group C, SECT, 100-kV; Group D, DECT, 90/Sn150-kV). Assessment of radiation dose was performed for an average scan length of 27 cm. Contrast-to-noise ratio measurements and dose-independent figure-of-merit calculations of the submandibular gland, thyroid, internal jugular vein, and common carotid artery were analyzed quantitatively. Qualitative image parameters were evaluated regarding overall image quality, artifacts and reader confidence using 5-point Likert scales.

Results: Effective radiation dose (ED) was not significantly different between SECT and DECT acquisition for each scanner generation ( = 0.10). Significantly lower effective radiation dose ( < 0.01) values were observed for third-generation DSCT groups C (1.1 ± 0.2 mSv) and D (1.0 ± 0.3 mSv) compared to second-generation DSCT groups A (1.8 ± 0.1 mSv) and B (1.6 ± 0.2 mSv). Figure-of-merit/contrast-to-noise ratio analysis revealed superior results for third-generation DECT Group D compared to all other groups. Qualitative image parameters showed non-significant differences between all groups ( > 0.06).

Conclusion: Contrast-enhanced head and neck DECT can be performed with second- and third-generation DSCT systems without radiation penalty or impaired image quality compared with SECT, while third-generation DSCT is the most dose efficient acquisition method.

Advances In Knowledge: Differences in radiation dose between SECT and DECT of the dose-vulnerable head and neck region using DSCT systems have not been evaluated so far. Therefore, this study directly compares radiation dose and image quality of standard SECT and DECT protocols of second- and third-generation DSCT platforms.

Citing Articles

Virtual unenhanced dual-energy computed tomography for photon radiotherapy: The effect on dose distribution and cone-beam computed tomography based position verification.

Afifah M, Bulthuis M, Goudschaal K, Verbeek-Spijkerman J, Rosario T, den Boer D Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2024; 29:100545.

PMID: 38369991 PMC: 10869258. DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100545.

Ultra-High-Resolution CT of the Head and Neck with Deep Learning Reconstruction-Assessment of Image Quality and Radiation Exposure and Intraindividual Comparison with Normal-Resolution CT.

Altmann S, Abello Mercado M, Ucar F, Kronfeld A, Al-Nawas B, Mukhopadhyay A Diagnostics (Basel). 2023; 13(9).

PMID: 37174926 PMC: 10177822. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13091534.

Improved precision of noise estimation in CT with a volume-based approach.

Wisselink H, Jan Pelgrim G, Rook M, Dudurych I, van den Berge M, de Bock G Eur Radiol Exp. 2021; 5(1):39.

PMID: 34505172 PMC: 8429536. DOI: 10.1186/s41747-021-00237-x.

References

Schmidt D, Soderberg M, Nilsson M, Lindvall H, Christoffersen C, Leander P . Evaluation of image quality and radiation dose of abdominal dual-energy CT. Acta Radiol. 2017; 59(7):845-852. DOI: 10.1177/0284185117732806. View

Suntharalingam S, Stenzel E, Wetter A, Guberina N, Umutlu L, Schlosser T . Third generation dual-energy CT with 80/150 Sn kV for head and neck tumor imaging. Acta Radiol. 2018; 60(5):586-592. DOI: 10.1177/0284185118788896. View

Al-Baldawi Y, Grosse Hokamp N, Haneder S, Steinhauser S, Pusken M, Persigehl T . Virtual mono-energetic images and iterative image reconstruction: abdominal vessel imaging in the era of spectral detector CT. Clin Radiol. 2020; 75(8):641.e9-641.e18. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2020.03.036. View

Leithner D, Mahmoudi S, Wichmann J, Martin S, Lenga L, Albrecht M . Evaluation of virtual monoenergetic imaging algorithms for dual-energy carotid and intracerebral CT angiography: Effects on image quality, artefacts and diagnostic performance for the detection of stenosis. Eur J Radiol. 2018; 99:111-117. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.12.024. View

Sullivan G, Artino Jr A . Analyzing and interpreting data from likert-type scales. J Grad Med Educ. 2014; 5(4):541-2. PMC: 3886444. DOI: 10.4300/JGME-5-4-18. View

Mayo-Smith W, Hara A, Mahesh M, Sahani D, Pavlicek W . How I do it: managing radiation dose in CT. Radiology. 2014; 273(3):657-72. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14132328. View

Petritsch B, Kosmala A, Gassenmaier T, Weng A, Veldhoen S, Kunz A . Diagnosis of Pulmonary Artery Embolism: Comparison of Single-Source CT and 3rd Generation Dual-Source CT using a Dual-Energy Protocol Regarding Image Quality and Radiation Dose. Rofo. 2017; 189(6):527-536. DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-103089. View

Gordic S, Morsbach F, Schmidt B, Allmendinger T, Flohr T, Husarik D . Ultralow-dose chest computed tomography for pulmonary nodule detection: first performance evaluation of single energy scanning with spectral shaping. Invest Radiol. 2014; 49(7):465-73. DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000037. View

Grosse Hokamp N, Laukamp K, Lennartz S, Zopfs D, Abdullayev N, Neuhaus V . Artifact reduction from dental implants using virtual monoenergetic reconstructions from novel spectral detector CT. Eur J Radiol. 2018; 104:136-142. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.04.018. View

10.

Tabari A, Gee M, Singh R, Lim R, Nimkin K, Primak A . Reducing Radiation Dose and Contrast Medium Volume With Application of Dual-Energy CT in Children and Young Adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020; 214(6):1199-1205. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.19.22231. View

11.

Nam S, Jeong D, Choo K, Nam K, Hwang J, Lee J . Image quality of CT angiography in young children with congenital heart disease: a comparison between the sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) and advanced modelled iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE) algorithms. Clin Radiol. 2017; 72(12):1060-1065. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2017.07.006. View

12.

Hamada N . Ionizing radiation sensitivity of the ocular lens and its dose rate dependence. Int J Radiat Biol. 2016; 93(10):1024-1034. DOI: 10.1080/09553002.2016.1266407. View

13.

Meyer M, Haubenreisser H, Schoepf U, Vliegenthart R, Leidecker C, Allmendinger T . Closing in on the K edge: coronary CT angiography at 100, 80, and 70 kV-initial comparison of a second- versus a third-generation dual-source CT system. Radiology. 2014; 273(2):373-82. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14140244. View

14.

Bathla G, Priya S, Samaniego E, Deo S, Fain N, Soni N . Cerebral computed tomographic angiography using third-generation reconstruction algorithm provides improved image quality with lower contrast and radiation dose. Neuroradiology. 2020; 62(8):965-970. DOI: 10.1007/s00234-020-02406-y. View

15.

Wang T, Ghavidel B, Beitler J, Tang X, Lei Y, Curran W . Optimal virtual monoenergetic image in "TwinBeam" dual-energy CT for organs-at-risk delineation based on contrast-noise-ratio in head-and-neck radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019; 20(2):121-128. PMC: 6370994. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12539. View

16.

Wichmann J, Noske E, Kraft J, Burck I, Wagenblast J, Eckardt A . Virtual monoenergetic dual-energy computed tomography: optimization of kiloelectron volt settings in head and neck cancer. Invest Radiol. 2014; 49(11):735-41. DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000077. View

17.

Deak P, Smal Y, Kalender W . Multisection CT protocols: sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology. 2010; 257(1):158-66. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10100047. View

18.

Neuhaus V, Grosse Hokamp N, Abdullayev N, Maus V, Kabbasch C, Mpotsaris A . Comparison of virtual monoenergetic and polyenergetic images reconstructed from dual-layer detector CT angiography of the head and neck. Eur Radiol. 2017; 28(3):1102-1110. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5081-8. View

19.

Winklehner A, Gordic S, Lauk E, Frauenfelder T, Leschka S, Alkadhi H . Automated attenuation-based tube voltage selection for body CTA: Performance evaluation of 192-slice dual-source CT. Eur Radiol. 2015; 25(8):2346-53. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3632-4. View

20.

Wichmann J, Hardie A, Schoepf U, Felmly L, Perry J, Varga-Szemes A . Single- and dual-energy CT of the abdomen: comparison of radiation dose and image quality of 2nd and 3rd generation dual-source CT. Eur Radiol. 2016; 27(2):642-650. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4383-6. View