Jens Borgbjerg, Heidi S Christensen, Rozh Al-Mashhadi, Martin Bøgsted, Jens B Frøkjær, Lise Medrud, Nis Elbrønd Larsen, Jes S Lindholt
{"title":"Ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT and CT angiography can be used interchangeably for assessing maximal abdominal aortic diameter.","authors":"Jens Borgbjerg, Heidi S Christensen, Rozh Al-Mashhadi, Martin Bøgsted, Jens B Frøkjær, Lise Medrud, Nis Elbrønd Larsen, Jes S Lindholt","doi":"10.1177/20584601221132461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Routine CT scans may increasingly be used to document normal aortic size and to detect incidental abdominal aortic aneurysms.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine whether ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT (ULDNC-CT) can be used instead of the gold standard CT angiography (CTA) for assessment of maximal abdominal aortic diameter.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 50 patients who underwent CTA and a normal-dose non-contrast CT for suspected renal artery stenosis. ULDNC-CT datasets were generated from the normal-dose non-contrast CT datasets using a simulation technique. Using the centerline technique, radiology consultants (<i>n</i> = 4) and residents (<i>n</i> = 3) determined maximal abdominal aortic diameter. The limits of agreement with the mean (LOAM) was used to access observer agreement. LOAM represents how much a measurement by a single observer may plausibly deviate from the mean of all observers on the specific subject.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Observers completed 1400 measurements encompassing repeated CTA and ULDNC-CT measurements. The mean diameter was 24.0 and 25.0 mm for CTA and ULDNC-CT, respectively, yielding a significant but minor mean difference of 1.0 mm. The 95% LOAM reproducibility was similar for CTA and ULDNC-CT (2.3 vs 2.3 mm). In addition, the 95% LOAM and mean diameters were similar for CTA and ULDNC-CT when observers were grouped as consultants and residents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT exhibited similar accuracy and reproducibility of measurements compared with CTA for assessing maximal abdominal aortic diameter supporting that ULDNC-CT can be used interchangeably with CTA in the lower range of aortic sizes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72063,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/1e/09/10.1177_20584601221132461.PMC9561642.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20584601221132461","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Routine CT scans may increasingly be used to document normal aortic size and to detect incidental abdominal aortic aneurysms.
Purpose: To determine whether ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT (ULDNC-CT) can be used instead of the gold standard CT angiography (CTA) for assessment of maximal abdominal aortic diameter.
Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 50 patients who underwent CTA and a normal-dose non-contrast CT for suspected renal artery stenosis. ULDNC-CT datasets were generated from the normal-dose non-contrast CT datasets using a simulation technique. Using the centerline technique, radiology consultants (n = 4) and residents (n = 3) determined maximal abdominal aortic diameter. The limits of agreement with the mean (LOAM) was used to access observer agreement. LOAM represents how much a measurement by a single observer may plausibly deviate from the mean of all observers on the specific subject.
Results: Observers completed 1400 measurements encompassing repeated CTA and ULDNC-CT measurements. The mean diameter was 24.0 and 25.0 mm for CTA and ULDNC-CT, respectively, yielding a significant but minor mean difference of 1.0 mm. The 95% LOAM reproducibility was similar for CTA and ULDNC-CT (2.3 vs 2.3 mm). In addition, the 95% LOAM and mean diameters were similar for CTA and ULDNC-CT when observers were grouped as consultants and residents.
Conclusions: Ultra-low-dose non-contrast CT exhibited similar accuracy and reproducibility of measurements compared with CTA for assessing maximal abdominal aortic diameter supporting that ULDNC-CT can be used interchangeably with CTA in the lower range of aortic sizes.