Achala Donuru , Tetsuro Araki , Farouk Dako , Jaydev K. Dave , Raul Porto Perez , Dongming Xu , Arun Nachiappan , Eduardo Mortani Barbosa Jr , Peter Noel , Harold Litt , Friedrich Knollman
{"title":"Photon-counting detector CT allows significant reduction in radiation dose while maintaining image quality and noise on non-contrast chest CT","authors":"Achala Donuru , Tetsuro Araki , Farouk Dako , Jaydev K. Dave , Raul Porto Perez , Dongming Xu , Arun Nachiappan , Eduardo Mortani Barbosa Jr , Peter Noel , Harold Litt , Friedrich Knollman","doi":"10.1016/j.ejro.2023.100538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To investigate if clinical non-contrast chest CT studies obtained with PCD CT using much lower radiation exposure can achieve the same image quality as with the currently established EID protocol.</p></div><div><h3>Materials/methods</h3><p>A total of seventy-one patients were identified who had a non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) done on PCD CT and EID CT scanners within a 4-month interval. Five fellowship trained chest radiologists, blinded to the scanner details were asked to review the cases side-by-side and record their preference for images from either the photon-counting-detector (PCD) CT or the energy-integrating detector (EID) CT scanner.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The median CTDIvol for PCD-CT system was 4.710 mGy and EID system was 7.80 mGy (p < 0.001). The median DLP with the PCD-CT was 182.0 mGy.cm and EID system was 262.60 mGy.cm (p < 0.001). The contrast to noise ratio (CNR) was superior on the PCD-CT system 59.2 compared to the EID-CT 53.3; (p < 0.001). Kappa-statistic showed that there was poor agreement between the readers over the image quality from the PCD and EID scanners (κ = 0.19; 95 % CI: 0.12 – 0.27; p < 0.001). Chi-square analysis revealed that 3 out of 5 readers showed a significant preference for images from the PCDCT (p ≤ 0.012). There was no significant difference in the preferences of two readers between EID-CT and PCD-CT images.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The first clinical PCD-CT system allows a significant reduction in radiation exposure while maintaining image quality and image noise using a standardized non-contrast chest CT protocol.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38076,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Radiology Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352047723000643/pdfft?md5=e2e7964845d89b78014e8b130634a874&pid=1-s2.0-S2352047723000643-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Radiology Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352047723000643","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
To investigate if clinical non-contrast chest CT studies obtained with PCD CT using much lower radiation exposure can achieve the same image quality as with the currently established EID protocol.
Materials/methods
A total of seventy-one patients were identified who had a non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) done on PCD CT and EID CT scanners within a 4-month interval. Five fellowship trained chest radiologists, blinded to the scanner details were asked to review the cases side-by-side and record their preference for images from either the photon-counting-detector (PCD) CT or the energy-integrating detector (EID) CT scanner.
Results
The median CTDIvol for PCD-CT system was 4.710 mGy and EID system was 7.80 mGy (p < 0.001). The median DLP with the PCD-CT was 182.0 mGy.cm and EID system was 262.60 mGy.cm (p < 0.001). The contrast to noise ratio (CNR) was superior on the PCD-CT system 59.2 compared to the EID-CT 53.3; (p < 0.001). Kappa-statistic showed that there was poor agreement between the readers over the image quality from the PCD and EID scanners (κ = 0.19; 95 % CI: 0.12 – 0.27; p < 0.001). Chi-square analysis revealed that 3 out of 5 readers showed a significant preference for images from the PCDCT (p ≤ 0.012). There was no significant difference in the preferences of two readers between EID-CT and PCD-CT images.
Conclusion
The first clinical PCD-CT system allows a significant reduction in radiation exposure while maintaining image quality and image noise using a standardized non-contrast chest CT protocol.