OBJECTIVE: To assess if diagnostic dual energy CT (DECT) of the chest can be achieved at submillisievert (sub-mSv) doses. METHODS: Our IRB-approved prospective study included 20 patients who were scanned on dual-source multidector CT(MDCT). All patients gave written informed consent for acquisition of additional image series at reduced radiation dose on a dual-source MDCT (80/140 kV) within 10 s after the standard of care acquisition. Dose reduction was achieved by reducing the quality reference milliampere-second, with combined angular exposure control. Four readers, blinded to all clinical data, evaluated the image sets. Image noise, signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratio were assessed. Volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol), doselength product (DLP), size specific dose estimate, and effective dose were also recorded. RESULTS: The mean age and body mass index of the patients were 71 years ± 9 and 24 kg m-2 ± 3, respectively. Although images became noisier, overall image quality and image sharpness on blended images were considered good or excellent in all cases (20/20). All findings made on the reduced dose images presented with good demarcation. The intraobserver and interobserver agreements were κ = 0.83 and 0.73, respectively. Mean CTDIvol, size specific dose estimate, DLP and effective dose for reduced dose DECT were: 1.3 ± 0.2 mGy, 1.8 ± 0.2 mGy, 51 ± 9.9 mGy.cm and 0.7 ± 0.1 mSv, respectively. CONCLUSION: Routine chest DECT can be performed at sub-mSv doses with good image quality and without loss of relevant diagnostic information. Advances in knowledge: (1) Contrast-enhanced DECT of the chest can be performed at sub-mSv doses, down to mean CTDIvol 1.3 mGy and DLP 51 mGy.cm in patients with body mass index <31 kg m-2. (2) To our knowledge, this is the first time that sub-mSv doses have been successfully applied in a patient study using a dual source DECT scanner.
OBJECTIVE: To assess if diagnostic dual energy CT (DECT) of the chest can be achieved at submillisievert (sub-mSv) doses. METHODS: Our IRB-approved prospective study included 20 patients who were scanned on dual-source multidector CT(MDCT). All patients gave written informed consent for acquisition of additional image series at reduced radiation dose on a dual-source MDCT (80/140 kV) within 10 s after the standard of care acquisition. Dose reduction was achieved by reducing the quality reference milliampere-second, with combined angular exposure control. Four readers, blinded to all clinical data, evaluated the image sets. Image noise, signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratio were assessed. Volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol), doselength product (DLP), size specific dose estimate, and effective dose were also recorded. RESULTS: The mean age and body mass index of the patients were 71 years ± 9 and 24 kg m-2 ± 3, respectively. Although images became noisier, overall image quality and image sharpness on blended images were considered good or excellent in all cases (20/20). All findings made on the reduced dose images presented with good demarcation. The intraobserver and interobserver agreements were κ = 0.83 and 0.73, respectively. Mean CTDIvol, size specific dose estimate, DLP and effective dose for reduced dose DECT were: 1.3 ± 0.2 mGy, 1.8 ± 0.2 mGy, 51 ± 9.9 mGy.cm and 0.7 ± 0.1 mSv, respectively. CONCLUSION: Routine chest DECT can be performed at sub-mSv doses with good image quality and without loss of relevant diagnostic information. Advances in knowledge: (1) Contrast-enhanced DECT of the chest can be performed at sub-mSv doses, down to mean CTDIvol 1.3 mGy and DLP 51 mGy.cm in patients with body mass index <31 kg m-2. (2) To our knowledge, this is the first time that sub-mSv doses have been successfully applied in a patient study using a dual source DECT scanner.
Authors: Achille Mileto; Andrew Barina; Daniele Marin; Sandra S Stinnett; Kingshuk Roy Choudhury; Joshua M Wilson; Rendon C Nelson Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-11-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Frédéric A Miéville; François Gudinchet; Francis Brunelle; François O Bochud; Francis R Verdun Journal: Phys Med Date: 2012-01-02 Impact factor: 2.685
Authors: Sarabjeet Singh; Mannudeep K Kalra; Matthew D Gilman; Jiang Hsieh; Homer H Pien; Subba R Digumarthy; Jo-Anne O Shepard Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-03-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael M Maher; Thomas L Toth; Bernhard Schmidt; Bryan L Westerman; Hugh T Morgan; Sanjay Saini Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-10-21 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: W C Kan; A L Wiley; G W Wirtanen; T A Lange; P R Moran; B R Paliwal; R J Cashwell Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 1980-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Hae Jin Kim; So Young Park; Ho Yun Lee; Kyung Soo Lee; Kyung Eun Shin; Jung Won Moon Journal: Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-07-18 Impact factor: 4.679
Authors: Madan M Rehani; Kai Yang; Emily R Melick; John Heil; Dušan Šalát; William F Sensakovic; Bob Liu Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-12-02 Impact factor: 5.315