| Literature DB >> 35578057 |
Thomas Werncke1, Timo Christian Meine2, Jan B Hinrichs2, Sabine K Maschke2, Lena Sophie Becker2, Inga Brüsch3, Regina Rumpel3, Frank K Wacker2, Bernhard C Meyer2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this animal study was to compare the fluoroscopic image quality (IQ) and radiation dose between a tantalum (Ta)-specific contrast-to-noise ratio-driven exposure control (Ta-CEC) and a detector dose-driven exposure control (DEC) in abdominal angiography.Entities:
Keywords: Angiography (digital subtraction); Animals; Fluoroscopy; Radiation dosage; Tantalum
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35578057 PMCID: PMC9110612 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-022-00275-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol Exp ISSN: 2509-9280
Fig. 1Example of fluoroscopic images of the liver at 32 cm water value acquired with the detector dose-driven exposure control using the three detector dose levels (LD low dose, ND normal dose, HD high dose) in comparison with fluoroscopic images acquired with the Ta-specific contrast-to-noise ratio-driven exposure control at a comparable incident air kerma rate (dose equivalent Ta image). The first row shows the overview image (a) and the magnified reference image (b), which were acquired with digital radiography (DR). The iodine mixed with cyanoacrylate-filled vessels and the iodine-filled balloon are indicated by the open and closed arrow. The dotted arrow indicates the tantalum filled gastric and liver arteries. IQ Image quality level
Fluoroscopic image acquisition protocols of the detector dose-driven exposure control
| Parameter | Detector dose-driven exposure control | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Radiation dose level | Low dose | Normal dose | High dose |
| Acceleration potential plateau (kV) | 81 | 73 | 70 |
| Maximum pulse width (ms) | 12.5 | 12.5 | 12.5 |
| Minimum Cu-Filter (mm) | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 |
| Maximum Cu-Filter (mm) | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.3 |
| Focal spot | Small | Small | Small |
| Detector-dose (nGy/pulse) | 45 | 55 | 65 |
| Exposure point reduction | 2 | 2 EP | 0 EP |
| Maximum air kerma rate (mGy/min) | 160 | 160 | 160 |
| Frame rate (frames/s) | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 |
Fluoroscopic image acquisition protocols of the Ta-specific contrast-to-noise ratio-driven exposure control
| Parameter | Ta-specific contrast-to-noise ratio-driven exposure control |
|---|---|
| Spatial frequency (lp/mm) | 1.4 |
| Average velocity (mm/s) | 15 |
| Material of interest specific | tantalum |
| Image quality levels | 0.4, 0.7, 0.9, 1.1, 1.3, 1.6, 1.8, 2.2, 2.5, 2.8, 3.2, 3.6, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.6, 6.3, 7.1, 9.0, 18.0 |
| Image quality gradient | 0.5 |
| Maximum air kerma rate (mGy/min) | 160 |
| Minimum Cu filter (mm) | 0.1 |
| Maximum Cu filter (mm) | 0.9 |
| Frame rate (frames/s) | 7.5 |
| Reference water value (mm) | 230 |
Fig. 2Images of Onyx® embolised liver and gastric arteries at 27 cm water equivalent thickness acquired with digital radiography (DR) as reference image, DEC using the three radiation dose levels (LD Low dose, ND Normal dose, HD High dose) and CEC using different image quality levels (IQ 0.4–9.0)
Five-point Likert scale used for qualitative image assessment of tantalum structures
| Score | Image quality | |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Excellent | “More than diagnostic” to good image quality |
| 4 | Good | Good image quality |
| 3 | Sufficient | Sufficient image quality |
| 2 | Partial diagnostic | Partially insufficient image quality |
| 1 | Non-diagnostic | Insufficient image quality |
Fig. 3Average image quality ratings of the three readers for the detector dose-driven exposure control (DEC) and the dose equivalent Ta image acquired with the contrast-to-noise ratio driven exposure control (Ta-CEC), dependent on the dose level of the detector dose-driven exposure control and the water equivalent thickness
Incident air kerma rate at the interventional reference point and average image quality of all three readers of fluoroscopic images acquired with detector dose-driven exposure control (DEC) and Ta-specific contrast-to-noise ratio-driven exposure control (CEC), while maintaining the incident air kerma rate
| Mean WET (cm) | Dose level | Incident air kerma rate at the interventional reference point | Average image quality | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DEC | CEC | DEC | CEC | AUC | ||||
| 26 | LD | 6.6 ± 1.4 | 6.2 ± 1.3 | 0.003 | 2.6 ± 0.7 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 0.82 [0.68–0.93] | 0.018 |
| ND | 15.8 ± 3.9 | 15.4 ± 3.8 | 0.216 | 2.9 ± 0.4 | 4.2 ± 0.5 | 0.97 [0.89–1.00] | 0.014 | |
| HD | 28.8 ± 7.6 | 28.5 ± 7.5 | 0.147 | 3.3 ± 0.6 | 4.8 ± 0.4 | 0.98 [0.91–1.00] | 0.017 | |
| 31 | LD | 24.5 ± 5.1 | 23.5 ± 6.3 | 0.165 | 2.4 ± 0.8 | 3.3 ± 0.6 | 0.84 [0.64–1.00] | 0.020 |
| ND | 53.0 ± 4.4 | 50.8 ± 3.4 | 0.137 | 2.8 ± 0.5 | 4.4 ± 0.6 | 0.97 [0.89–1.00] | 0.022 | |
| HD | 86.1 ± 4.6 | 81.0 ± 7.7 | 0.044 | 3.2 ± 0.6 | 4.6 ± 0.6 | 0.93 [0.79–1.00] | 0.014 | |
| 36 | LD | 60.7 ± 4.5 | 58.1 ± 7.1 | 0.182 | 2.1 ± 0.7 | 2.9 ± 0.8 | 0.85 [0.67–1.00] | 0.019 |
| ND | 86.4 ± 5.7 | 83.7 ± 6.7 | 0.163 | 2.4 ± 0.6 | 3.3 ± 0.7 | 0.85 [0.68–0.93] | 0.011 | |
| HD | 129.4 ± 8.4 | 124.2 ± 14.1 | 0.212 | 2.8 ± 0.5 | 3.9 ± 0.7 | 0.93 [0.79–1.00] | 0.014 | |
Values are given as mean ± standard deviation. AUC Area under curve, CEC Contrast-to-noise ratio-driven exposure control, DEC Detector dose driven exposure control, LD Low dose, ND Normal dose, HD High dose, WET Water equivalent thickness
Fig. 4Incident air kerma at the interventional reference point (IRP) of fluoroscopic images acquired with detector dose driven exposure control (DEC) at three dose levels (LD: Low dose, ND: Normal dose, HD: High dose) and three water equivalent thicknesses, compared to the IRP of the image acquired with Ta-specific contrast-to-noise ratio driven exposure control at comparable image quality of the Ta structures. ***p < 0.001. IRP Interventional reference point