| Literature DB >> 34943428 |
Niels R van der Werf1, Margo van Gent2, Ronald Booij1, Daniel Bos1, Aad van der Lugt1, Ricardo P J Budde1, Marcel J W Greuter2,3, Marcel van Straten1.
Abstract
In order to assess coronary artery calcium (CAC) quantification reproducibility for photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT) at reduced tube potential, an anthropomorphic thorax phantom with low-, medium-, and high-density CAC inserts was scanned with PCCT (NAEOTOM Alpha, Siemens Healthineers) at two heart rates: 0 and 60-75 beats per minute (bpm). Five imaging protocols were used: 120 kVp standard dose (IQ level 16, reference), 90 kVp at standard (IQ level 16), 75% and 45% dose and tin-filtered 100 kVp at standard dose (IQ level 16). Each scan was repeated five times. Images were reconstructed using monoE reconstruction at 70 keV. For each heart rate, CAC values, quantified as Agatston scores, were compared with the reference, whereby deviations >10% were deemed clinically relevant. Reference protocol radiation dose (as volumetric CT dose index) was 4.06 mGy. Radiation dose was reduced by 27%, 44%, 67%, and 46% for the 90 kVp standard dose, 90 kVp 75% dose, 90 kVp 45% dose, and Sn100 standard dose protocol, respectively. For the low-density CAC, all reduced tube current protocols resulted in clinically relevant differences with the reference. For the medium- and high-density CAC, the implemented 90 kVp protocols and heart rates revealed no clinically relevant differences in Agatston score based on 95% confidence intervals. In conclusion, PCCT allows for reproducible Agatston scores at a reduced tube voltage of 90 kVp with radiation dose reductions up to 67% for medium- and high-density CAC.Entities:
Keywords: X-ray computed tomography; calcium; coronary vessels; image quality; imaging phantoms; photon counting detector; radiation dose
Year: 2021 PMID: 34943428 PMCID: PMC8699960 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11122192
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) ISSN: 2075-4418
Acquisition and reconstruction parameters.
| Parameter | Reference Scan | 90 kVp | 90 kVp | 90 kVp | Sn100 kVp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT system | PCCT | PCCT | PCCT | PCCT | PCCT |
| Technique | Axial | Axial | Axial | Axial | Axial |
| Tube voltage (kVp) | 120 | 90 | 90 | 90 | 100 + Sn filter |
| Effective tube current time product (mAs) | 20 1 | 45 1 | 34 | 20 | 134 1 |
| Automatic exposure control | Off | Off | Off | Off | Off |
| Collimation (mm) | 144 × 0.4 | 144 × 0.4 | 144 × 0.4 | 144 × 0.4 | 144 × 0.4 |
| Field of view (mm) | 220 | 220 | 220 | 220 | 220 |
| Rotation time (s) | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 |
| Slice thickness/increment (mm) | 3.0/1.5 | 3.0/1.5 | 3.0/1.5 | 3.0/1.5 | 3.0/1.5 |
| Reconstruction kernel | Qr36 | Qr36 | Qr36 | Qr36 | Qr36 |
| Matrix size (pixels) | 512 × 512 | 512 × 512 | 512 × 512 | 512 × 512 | 512 × 512 |
| Reconstruction | FBP 2 | FBP 2 | FBP 2 | FBP 2 | FBP 2 |
| monoE level (keV) | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 |
| Repetitions | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Phantom speed | 0 & 20 mm/s | 0 & 20 mm/s | 0 & 20 mm/s | 0 & 20 mm/s | 0 & 20 mm/s |
| CTDIvol (mGy) | 4.06 | 2.97 | 2.26 | 1.33 | 2.21 |
1 Based on the vendor recommended reference CareIQ level 16. 2 FBP: filtered back projection. The setting used was actually Quantum Iterative Reconstruction (QIR, Siemens Healthineers) off, which is comparable to a conventional reconstruction in terms of the expected noise level.
Figure 1MonoE reconstructed images of the low-density CAC at 70 keV for all combinations used of tube potential, radiation dose, and heart rate. Noise-power-spectra (NPS) are indicated in the right column.
Figure 2Contrast-to-noise ratio box and whisker plots for the low-, medium-, and high-density calcification, translated at 0 and 60–75 bpm for all combinations of tube potential and radiation dose.
Figure 3Mean and 95% confidence interval Agatston score deviation in % from the reference (120 kVp IQ level 16) with (A) stationary calcifications and (B) moving calcifications at 60–75 bpm. The dashed lines indicate deviations of ±10%, which is the threshold for clinically relevant differences.