Accuracy and Robustness of Bone Volume Fraction Assessment by Photon-Counting, Dual-Energy, and Quantitative CT using Micro-CT as Standard of Reference.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Patrik Wili, Dominic Gascho, Alice Dudle, Roy P Marcus, Daniel Nanz, Michael Thali, Philippe Zysset
{"title":"Accuracy and Robustness of Bone Volume Fraction Assessment by Photon-Counting, Dual-Energy, and Quantitative CT using Micro-CT as Standard of Reference.","authors":"Patrik Wili, Dominic Gascho, Alice Dudle, Roy P Marcus, Daniel Nanz, Michael Thali, Philippe Zysset","doi":"10.1007/s10439-025-03732-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to quantitatively compare different computed tomography (CT)-based bone volume fraction (BV/TV) measurements. We hypothesize that phantom-less measurement using virtual monochromatic images (VMI) reconstructed form dual-energy CT (DECT) or photon counting CT (PCT) is less affected by tissue variations in trabecular bone than quantitative CT (QCT) and that PCT allows measurements with a lower radiation dose.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The BV/TV of bovine trabecular bone samples were measured using four CT scanning methods. Eight different measurements were compared using three soft tissue substitutes (air, saline solution, and fat) to investigate its effect on BV/TV estimation. For this purpose, the samples' bone marrow was removed and replaced with one of the three substitutes in succession for CT scanning. For QCT, a standard bone phantom was used to derive BV/TV form CT values. While DECT- and PCT-based measurements were based on a system of energy-dependent equations established by reconstructing VMIs for specific photon energies. T-test, ANOVA tests and pairwise comparison were performed using the micro-CT (µCT) measurements as reference standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>QCT showed a significant difference between the fat, saline solution, and air. DECT and especially PCT showed no differences between the substitutes. PCT showed no significant differences between radiation doses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results highlight the complexity of BV/TV measurements and emphasize the impact of the trabecular bone components on measurement accuracy. Despite these challenges, VMIs from \"low\" dose PCT provide a reliable alternative to standard QCT. They have the potential to improve the estimation of bone conditions, as well offering valuable insights for clinical, and forensic applications.</p>","PeriodicalId":7986,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Biomedical Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Biomedical Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-025-03732-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to quantitatively compare different computed tomography (CT)-based bone volume fraction (BV/TV) measurements. We hypothesize that phantom-less measurement using virtual monochromatic images (VMI) reconstructed form dual-energy CT (DECT) or photon counting CT (PCT) is less affected by tissue variations in trabecular bone than quantitative CT (QCT) and that PCT allows measurements with a lower radiation dose.

Method: The BV/TV of bovine trabecular bone samples were measured using four CT scanning methods. Eight different measurements were compared using three soft tissue substitutes (air, saline solution, and fat) to investigate its effect on BV/TV estimation. For this purpose, the samples' bone marrow was removed and replaced with one of the three substitutes in succession for CT scanning. For QCT, a standard bone phantom was used to derive BV/TV form CT values. While DECT- and PCT-based measurements were based on a system of energy-dependent equations established by reconstructing VMIs for specific photon energies. T-test, ANOVA tests and pairwise comparison were performed using the micro-CT (µCT) measurements as reference standard.

Results: QCT showed a significant difference between the fat, saline solution, and air. DECT and especially PCT showed no differences between the substitutes. PCT showed no significant differences between radiation doses.

Conclusion: Our results highlight the complexity of BV/TV measurements and emphasize the impact of the trabecular bone components on measurement accuracy. Despite these challenges, VMIs from "low" dose PCT provide a reliable alternative to standard QCT. They have the potential to improve the estimation of bone conditions, as well offering valuable insights for clinical, and forensic applications.

以Micro-CT为参比标准的光子计数、双能和定量CT评估骨体积分数的准确性和稳健性。
目的:我们旨在定量比较不同的基于计算机断层扫描(CT)的骨体积分数(BV/TV)测量。我们假设使用双能CT (DECT)或光子计数CT (PCT)重建的虚拟单色图像(VMI)进行无影测量比定量CT (QCT)受小梁骨组织变化的影响更小,并且PCT允许以更低的辐射剂量进行测量。方法:采用四种CT扫描方法测定牛小梁骨标本的BV/TV。使用三种软组织替代品(空气、生理盐水溶液和脂肪)比较了八种不同的测量方法,以研究其对BV/TV估计的影响。为此,将样本的骨髓取出,依次用三种替代品中的一种替代,进行CT扫描。对于QCT,使用标准骨模来获得BV/TV形式CT值。而基于DECT和pct的测量则是基于重构特定光子能量的VMIs而建立的能量依赖方程系统。以微CT(µCT)测量值为参考标准,进行t检验、方差分析和两两比较。结果:脂肪、生理盐水和空气的QCT显示有显著性差异。DECT与PCT的代用品间无明显差异。PCT显示不同辐射剂量间无显著差异。结论:我们的研究结果突出了BV/TV测量的复杂性,并强调了骨小梁构件对测量精度的影响。尽管存在这些挑战,“低”剂量PCT的VMIs为标准QCT提供了可靠的替代方案。它们有可能改善对骨骼状况的估计,并为临床和法医应用提供有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
Annals of Biomedical Engineering 工程技术-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
15.80%
发文量
212
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Annals of Biomedical Engineering is an official journal of the Biomedical Engineering Society, publishing original articles in the major fields of bioengineering and biomedical engineering. The Annals is an interdisciplinary and international journal with the aim to highlight integrated approaches to the solutions of biological and biomedical problems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信