Paul F FitzGerald1, Robert E Colborn1, Peter M Edic1, Jack W Lambert1, Andrew S Torres1, Peter J Bonitatibus1, Benjamin M Yeh1. 1. From the Radiation Systems Lab (P.F.F.), Emission Chemistry and Catalysis Lab (R.E.C., P.J.B.), Department of CT, X-ray and Functional Imaging (P.M.E.), and GE Ventures (A.S.T.), GE Global Research, One Research Circle, Niskayuna, NY 12309; and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (J.W.L., B.M.Y.).
Abstract
PURPOSE: To quantify the computed tomographic (CT) image contrast produced by potentially useful contrast material elements in clinically relevant imaging conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Equal mass concentrations (grams of active element per milliliter of solution) of seven radiodense elements, including iodine, barium, gadolinium, tantalum, ytterbium, gold, and bismuth, were formulated as compounds in aqueous solutions. The compounds were chosen such that the active element dominated the x-ray attenuation of the solution. The solutions were imaged within a modified 32-cm CT dose index phantom at 80, 100, 120, and 140 kVp at CT. To simulate larger body sizes, 0.2-, 0.5-, and 1.0-mm-thick copper filters were applied. CT image contrast was measured and corrected for measured concentrations and presence of chlorine in some compounds. RESULTS: Each element tested provided higher image contrast than iodine at some tube potential levels. Over the range of tube potentials that are clinically practical for average-sized and larger adults-that is, 100 kVp and higher-barium, gadolinium, ytterbium, and tantalum provided consistently increased image contrast compared with iodine, respectively demonstrating 39%, 56%, 34%, and 24% increases at 100 kVp; 39%, 66%, 53%, and 46% increases at 120 kVp; and 40%, 72%, 65%, and 60% increases at 140 kVp, with no added x-ray filter. CONCLUSION: The consistently high image contrast produced with 100-140 kVp by tantalum compared with bismuth and iodine at equal mass concentration suggests that tantalum could potentially be favorable for use as a clinical CT contrast agent.
PURPOSE: To quantify the computed tomographic (CT) image contrast produced by potentially useful contrast material elements in clinically relevant imaging conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Equal mass concentrations (grams of active element per milliliter of solution) of seven radiodense elements, including iodine, barium, gadolinium, tantalum, ytterbium, gold, and bismuth, were formulated as compounds in aqueous solutions. The compounds were chosen such that the active element dominated the x-ray attenuation of the solution. The solutions were imaged within a modified 32-cm CT dose index phantom at 80, 100, 120, and 140 kVp at CT. To simulate larger body sizes, 0.2-, 0.5-, and 1.0-mm-thick copper filters were applied. CT image contrast was measured and corrected for measured concentrations and presence of chlorine in some compounds. RESULTS: Each element tested provided higher image contrast than iodine at some tube potential levels. Over the range of tube potentials that are clinically practical for average-sized and larger adults-that is, 100 kVp and higher-barium, gadolinium, ytterbium, and tantalum provided consistently increased image contrast compared with iodine, respectively demonstrating 39%, 56%, 34%, and 24% increases at 100 kVp; 39%, 66%, 53%, and 46% increases at 120 kVp; and 40%, 72%, 65%, and 60% increases at 140 kVp, with no added x-ray filter. CONCLUSION: The consistently high image contrast produced with 100-140 kVp by tantalum compared with bismuth and iodine at equal mass concentration suggests that tantalum could potentially be favorable for use as a clinical CT contrast agent.
Authors: Peter J Bonitatibus; Andrew S Torres; Gregory D Goddard; Paul F FitzGerald; Amit M Kulkarni Journal: Chem Commun (Camb) Date: 2010-10-25 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Price A Jackson; Wan Nordiana W Abd Rahman; Christopher J Wong; Trevor Ackerly; Moshi Geso Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2009-04-29 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Jack W Lambert; Paul F FitzGerald; Peter M Edic; Yuxin Sun; Peter J Bonitatibus; Robert E Colborn; Benjamin M Yeh Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2017 May/Jun Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Chelsea A S Dunning; Jericho O'Connell; Spencer M Robinson; Kevin J Murphy; Adriaan L Frencken; Frank C J M van Veggel; Kris Iniewski; Magdalena Bazalova-Carter Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2020-06-15
Authors: Jack W Lambert; Yuxin Sun; Karen G Ordovas; Robert G Gould; Sizhe Wang; Benjamin M Yeh Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2018 May/Jun Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Salim Si-Mohamed; David P Cormode; Daniel Bar-Ness; Monica Sigovan; Pratap C Naha; Jean-Baptiste Langlois; Lara Chalabreysse; Philippe Coulon; Ira Blevis; Ewald Roessl; Klaus Erhard; Loic Boussel; Philippe Douek Journal: Nanoscale Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 7.790
Authors: Xue Rui; Yannan Jin; Paul F FitzGerald; Mingye Wu; Adam M Alessio; Paul E Kinahan; Bruno De Man Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Benjamin M Yeh; Paul F FitzGerald; Peter M Edic; Jack W Lambert; Robert E Colborn; Michael E Marino; Paul M Evans; Jeannette C Roberts; Zhen J Wang; Margaret J Wong; Peter J Bonitatibus Journal: Adv Drug Deliv Rev Date: 2016-09-09 Impact factor: 15.470
Authors: Pratap C Naha; Jessica C Hsu; Johoon Kim; Shrey Shah; Mathilde Bouché; Salim Si-Mohamed; Derick N Rosario-Berrios; Philippe Douek; Maryam Hajfathalian; Parisa Yasini; Sanjay Singh; Mark A Rosen; Matthew A Morgan; David P Cormode Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2020-07-28 Impact factor: 15.881