Alexander M El-Ali, Naomi Strubel, Lynne Pinkney, Christine Xue, Bari Dane, Shailee V Lala
{"title":"Pediatric contrast-enhanced chest CT on a photon-counting detector CT: radiation dose and image quality compared to energy-integrated detector CT.","authors":"Alexander M El-Ali, Naomi Strubel, Lynne Pinkney, Christine Xue, Bari Dane, Shailee V Lala","doi":"10.1007/s00247-024-06078-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Photon counting detector (PCD) CT benefits from reduced noise compared with conventional energy-integrating detector (EID) CT, which should translate to improved image quality and reduced radiation exposure for pediatric patients undergoing chest CT with IV contrast.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the differences in radiation exposure and image quality of PCD CT and EID CT in pediatric chest CT with intravenous (IV) contrast.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this institutional review board-approved retrospective observational study, 20 scan pairs (20 PCD CT; 20 EID CT) for children who underwent chest CT with IV contrast on both a PCD CT (Siemens NAEOTOM Alpha) and an EID CT (Siemens SOMATOM Definition Edge or Force) within 12 months were reviewed independently by three pediatric radiologists for three subjective quality features on 5-point Likert scales: overall quality, small structure delineation, and motion artifact. Objective measures of image quality (image noise, signal-to-noise ratio, and contrast-to-noise ratio) were assessed by a single radiologist in several locations in the chest through region of interest measurement of Hounsfield units (HU) and standard deviation. Patient-related and radiation exposure parameters were collected for each scan and summarized with median and interquartile range (IQR). The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was utilized to compare groups. A P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance. Inter-observer agreement of subjective image quality metrics was analyzed using weighted kappa.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Age (14.2 years vs 13.8 years, P= 0.15), height (P= 0.13), weight (P= 0.21), and BMI (P = 0.24) did not significantly differ between groups. There were 10 male and 3 female patients. Compared to EID CT, PCD CT showed lower radiation exposure parameters including volumetric CT dose index, 1.7 mGy (IQR 1.1-2.4 mGy) vs 3.8 mGy (IQR 2.0-4.7 mGy) (P< 0.01), and size-specific dose estimate, 2.6 mGy (IQR 1.8-3.1 mGy) vs 5.0 mGy (IQR 3.3-6.2 mGy) (P< 0.01). Objective image quality of lung parenchyma was improved on the PCD CT scanner, including image noise 119.5 HU (IQR 95.4-135.7 HU) vs 143.1 HU (IQR 125.4-169.8 HU) (P < 0.01), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) -6.1 (IQR -8.4 to -4.8) vs -4.9 (IQR -5.6 to -3.8) (P= 0.01), and contrast-to-noise ratio -63.9 (-84.1 to -57.5) vs -60.5 (-76.3 to -52.5) (P = 0.01). Motion artifact was improved on the PCD CT scanner (P< 0.01). No significant differences in overall image quality or small structure delineation were identified (P= 0.06 and P= 0.31).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PCD CT pediatric chest CT had significantly reduced radiation exposure, improved image quality, and reduced motion artifact compared with EID CT.</p>","PeriodicalId":19755,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"1984-1995"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-024-06078-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Photon counting detector (PCD) CT benefits from reduced noise compared with conventional energy-integrating detector (EID) CT, which should translate to improved image quality and reduced radiation exposure for pediatric patients undergoing chest CT with IV contrast.
Objective: To determine the differences in radiation exposure and image quality of PCD CT and EID CT in pediatric chest CT with intravenous (IV) contrast.
Materials and methods: In this institutional review board-approved retrospective observational study, 20 scan pairs (20 PCD CT; 20 EID CT) for children who underwent chest CT with IV contrast on both a PCD CT (Siemens NAEOTOM Alpha) and an EID CT (Siemens SOMATOM Definition Edge or Force) within 12 months were reviewed independently by three pediatric radiologists for three subjective quality features on 5-point Likert scales: overall quality, small structure delineation, and motion artifact. Objective measures of image quality (image noise, signal-to-noise ratio, and contrast-to-noise ratio) were assessed by a single radiologist in several locations in the chest through region of interest measurement of Hounsfield units (HU) and standard deviation. Patient-related and radiation exposure parameters were collected for each scan and summarized with median and interquartile range (IQR). The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was utilized to compare groups. A P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance. Inter-observer agreement of subjective image quality metrics was analyzed using weighted kappa.
Results: Age (14.2 years vs 13.8 years, P= 0.15), height (P= 0.13), weight (P= 0.21), and BMI (P = 0.24) did not significantly differ between groups. There were 10 male and 3 female patients. Compared to EID CT, PCD CT showed lower radiation exposure parameters including volumetric CT dose index, 1.7 mGy (IQR 1.1-2.4 mGy) vs 3.8 mGy (IQR 2.0-4.7 mGy) (P< 0.01), and size-specific dose estimate, 2.6 mGy (IQR 1.8-3.1 mGy) vs 5.0 mGy (IQR 3.3-6.2 mGy) (P< 0.01). Objective image quality of lung parenchyma was improved on the PCD CT scanner, including image noise 119.5 HU (IQR 95.4-135.7 HU) vs 143.1 HU (IQR 125.4-169.8 HU) (P < 0.01), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) -6.1 (IQR -8.4 to -4.8) vs -4.9 (IQR -5.6 to -3.8) (P= 0.01), and contrast-to-noise ratio -63.9 (-84.1 to -57.5) vs -60.5 (-76.3 to -52.5) (P = 0.01). Motion artifact was improved on the PCD CT scanner (P< 0.01). No significant differences in overall image quality or small structure delineation were identified (P= 0.06 and P= 0.31).
Conclusion: PCD CT pediatric chest CT had significantly reduced radiation exposure, improved image quality, and reduced motion artifact compared with EID CT.
期刊介绍:
Official Journal of the European Society of Pediatric Radiology, the Society for Pediatric Radiology and the Asian and Oceanic Society for Pediatric Radiology
Pediatric Radiology informs its readers of new findings and progress in all areas of pediatric imaging and in related fields. This is achieved by a blend of original papers, complemented by reviews that set out the present state of knowledge in a particular area of the specialty or summarize specific topics in which discussion has led to clear conclusions. Advances in technology, methodology, apparatus and auxiliary equipment are presented, and modifications of standard techniques are described.
Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted.