Domenico De Santis1,2, Damiano Caruso2, U Joseph Schoepf3, Marwen Eid1, Moritz H Albrecht1,4, Taylor M Duguay1, Akos Varga-Szemes1, Andrea Laghi2, Carlo N De Cecco1. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, 25 Courtenay Drive, Charleston, SC, USA. 2. Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncological and Pathological Sciences University of Rome "Sapienza", Latina, Italy. 3. Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, 25 Courtenay Drive, Charleston, SC, USA. schoepf@musc.edu. 4. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the minimum iodine delivery rate (IDR) required to achieve diagnostic coronary attenuation (300 HU) with dual-energy coronary CTA. METHODS: Acquisitions were performed on a circulation phantom with a third- generation dual-source CT scanner. Contrast media was injected for a fixed time whilst IDRs varied from 1.0 to 0.3 gI/s in 0.1-gI/s intervals. Noise-optimized virtual monoenergetic imaging (VMI+) reconstructions from 40 to 90 keV in 5 keV increments were generated. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and coronary HU were measured for each injection. RESULTS: VMI+ from 40-70 keV reached diagnostic attenuation with at least one IDR. The minimum IDR achieving a diagnostic attenuation ranged from 0.4 gI/s at 40 keV (312.8 HU) to 1.0 gI/s at 70 keV (334.1 HU). Attenuation values reached with IDR of 1.0 gI/s were significantly higher at each keV level (p<0.001). CNR showed a near perfect correlation with the IDR (ρ≥0.962; p<0.001), the IDR of 1.0 gI/s provided the highest CNR at each keV level, achieving the highest overall value at 40 keV (54.0±3.1). CONCLUSIONS: IDRs from 0.4-1.0 gI/s associated with VMI+ from 40-70 keV provide diagnostic coronary attenuation with dual-energy coronary CTA. KEY POINTS: • Iodine delivery rate (IDR) is a major determinant of contrast enhancement. • Low-keV noise-optimized monoenergetic images (VMI+) maximize iodine attenuation. • Low-keV VMI+ allows for lower IDRs while maintaining adequate coronary attenuation. • Lowest IDR to reach 300 HU was 0.4 gI/s, 40 keV VMI+.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the minimum iodine delivery rate (IDR) required to achieve diagnostic coronary attenuation (300 HU) with dual-energy coronary CTA. METHODS: Acquisitions were performed on a circulation phantom with a third- generation dual-source CT scanner. Contrast media was injected for a fixed time whilst IDRs varied from 1.0 to 0.3 gI/s in 0.1-gI/s intervals. Noise-optimized virtual monoenergetic imaging (VMI+) reconstructions from 40 to 90 keV in 5 keV increments were generated. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and coronary HU were measured for each injection. RESULTS: VMI+ from 40-70 keV reached diagnostic attenuation with at least one IDR. The minimum IDR achieving a diagnostic attenuation ranged from 0.4 gI/s at 40 keV (312.8 HU) to 1.0 gI/s at 70 keV (334.1 HU). Attenuation values reached with IDR of 1.0 gI/s were significantly higher at each keV level (p<0.001). CNR showed a near perfect correlation with the IDR (ρ≥0.962; p<0.001), the IDR of 1.0 gI/s provided the highest CNR at each keV level, achieving the highest overall value at 40 keV (54.0±3.1). CONCLUSIONS: IDRs from 0.4-1.0 gI/s associated with VMI+ from 40-70 keV provide diagnostic coronary attenuation with dual-energy coronary CTA. KEY POINTS: • Iodine delivery rate (IDR) is a major determinant of contrast enhancement. • Low-keV noise-optimized monoenergetic images (VMI+) maximize iodine attenuation. • Low-keV VMI+ allows for lower IDRs while maintaining adequate coronary attenuation. • Lowest IDR to reach 300 HU was 0.4 gI/s, 40 keV VMI+.
Authors: Casper Mihl; Joachim E Wildberger; Tomas Jurencak; Michael J Yanniello; Estelle C Nijssen; John F Kalafut; Georgi Nalbantov; Georg Mühlenbruch; Florian F Behrendt; Marco Das Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Markus Weininger; J Michael Barraza; Corey A Kemper; John F Kalafut; Philip Costello; U Joseph Schoepf Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Damiano Caruso; Marwen Eid; U Joseph Schoepf; Domenico De Santis; Akos Varga-Szemes; Stefanie Mangold; Christian Canstein; Virginia W Lesslie; Stephen R Fuller; B Devon Ball; Andrea Laghi; Carlo N De Cecco Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2017 Sep/Oct Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Moritz H Albrecht; Jesko Trommer; Julian L Wichmann; Jan-Erik Scholtz; Simon S Martin; Thomas Lehnert; Thomas J Vogl; Boris Bodelle Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Mathias Meyer; Holger Haubenreisser; U Joseph Schoepf; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Christianne Leidecker; Thomas Allmendinger; Ralf Lehmann; Sonja Sudarski; Martin Borggrefe; Stefan O Schoenberg; Thomas Henzler Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-05-31 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Michael M Lell; Gregor Jost; Johannes Georg Korporaal; Andreas Horst Mahnken; Thomas G Flohr; Michael Uder; Hubertus Pietsch Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Tommaso D'Angelo; Giuseppe Cicero; Silvio Mazziotti; Giorgio Ascenti; Moritz H Albrecht; Simon S Martin; Ahmed E Othman; Thomas J Vogl; Julian L Wichmann Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2019-04-09 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: David C Rotzinger; Salim A Si-Mohamed; Jérôme Yerly; Sara Boccalini; Fabio Becce; Loïc Boussel; Reto A Meuli; Salah D Qanadli; Philippe C Douek Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 5.315