In Vivo Comparison of Radiation Exposure in Third-Generation vs Second-Generation Dual-Source Dual-Energy CT for Imaging Urinary Calculi.

Purpose: To investigate the potential for decreasing radiation dose when utilizing a third-generation vs second-generation dual-source dual-energy CT (dsDECT) scanner, while maintaining diagnostic image quality and acceptable image noise. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent dsDECT for clinical suspicion of urolithiasis from October 2, 2017, to September 5, 2018. Patient demographics, body mass index, abdominal diameter, scanning parameters, and CT dose index volume (CTDIvol) were recorded. Image quality was assessed by measuring the attenuation and standard deviation (SD) regions of interest in the aorta and in the bladder. Image noise was determined by averaging the SD at both levels. Patients were excluded if they had not undergone both third- and second-generation dual-energy CT (DECT), time between DECT was more than 2 years, or scan parameters were outside the standard protocol. Results: A total of 117 patients met the inclusion criteria. Examinations performed on a third-generation DECT had an average CTDIvol 12.3 mGy, while examinations performed on a second-generation DECT had an average CTDIvol 13.3 mGy (p < 0.001). Average image noise was significantly lower for the third-generation DECT (SD = 10.3) compared with the second-generation DECT (SD = 13.9) (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The third-generation dsDECT scanners can simultaneously decrease patient radiation dose and decrease image noise compared with second-generation DECT. These reductions in radiation exposure can be particularly important in patients with urinary stone disease who often require repeated imaging to evaluate for stone development and recurrence as well as treatment assessment.

Spatial Distribution of Iron Within the Normal Human Liver Using Dual-Source Dual-Energy CT Imaging.

OBJECTIVES: Explore the potential of dual-source dual-energy (DSDE) computed tomography (CT) to retrospectively analyze the uniformity of iron distribution and establish iron concentration ranges and distribution patterns found in healthy livers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten mixtures consisting of an iron nitrate solution and deionized water were prepared in test tubes and scanned using a DSDE 128-slice CT system. Iron images were derived from a 3-material decomposition algorithm (optimized for the quantification of iron). A conversion factor (mg Fe/mL per Hounsfield unit) was calculated from this phantom study as the quotient of known tube concentrations and their corresponding CT values. Retrospective analysis was performed of patients who had undergone DSDE imaging for renal stones. Thirty-seven patients with normal liver function were randomly selected (mean age, 52.5 years). The examinations were processed for iron concentration. Multiple regions of interest were analyzed, and iron concentration (mg Fe/mL) and distribution was reported. RESULTS: The mean conversion factor obtained from the phantom study was 0.15 mg Fe/mL per Hounsfield unit. Whole-liver mean iron concentrations yielded a range of 0.0 to 2.91 mg Fe/mL, with 94.6% (35/37) of the patients exhibiting mean concentrations below 1.0 mg Fe/mL. The most important finding was that iron concentration was not uniform and patients exhibited regionally high concentrations (36/37). These regions of higher concentration were observed to be dominant in the middle-to-upper part of the liver (75%), medially (72.2%), and anteriorly (83.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Dual-source dual-energy CT can be used to assess the uniformity of iron distribution in healthy subjects. Applying similar techniques to unhealthy livers, future research may focus on the impact of hepatic iron content and distribution for noninvasive assessment in diseased subjects.

U.S. Diagnostic Reference Levels and Achievable Doses for 10 Adult CT Examinations.

Purpose To develop diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) and achievable doses (ADs) for the 10 most common adult computed tomographic (CT) examinations in the United States as a function of patient size by using the CT Dose Index Registry. Materials and Methods Data from the 10 most commonly performed adult CT head, neck, and body examinations from 583 facilities were analyzed. For head examinations, the lateral thickness was used as an indicator of patient size; for neck and body examinations, water-equivalent diameter was used. Data from 1 310 727 examinations (analyzed by using SAS 9.3) provided median values, as well as means and 25th and 75th (DRL) percentiles for volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), dose-length product (DLP), and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE). Applicable results were compared with DRLs from eight countries. Results More than 46% of the facilities were community hospitals; 13% were academic facilities. More than 48% were in metropolitan areas, 39% were suburban, and 13% were rural. More than 50% of the facilities performed fewer than 500 examinations per month. The abdomen and pelvis was the most frequently performed examination in the study (45%). For body examinations, DRLs (75th percentile) and ADs (median) for CTDIvol, SSDE, and DLP increased consistently with the patient's size (water-equivalent diameter). The relationships between patient size and DRLs and ADs were not as strong for head and neck examinations. These results agree well with the data from other countries. Conclusion DRLs and ADs as a function of patient size were developed for the 10 most common adult CT examinations performed in the United States. © RSNA, 2017.

Practical dose point-based methods to characterize dose distribution in a stationary elliptical body phantom for a cone-beam C-arm CT system.

PURPOSE: To propose new dose point measurement-based metrics to characterize the dose distributions and the mean dose from a single partial rotation of an automatic exposure control-enabled, C-arm-based, wide cone angle computed tomography system over a stationary, large, body-shaped phantom. METHODS: A small 0.6 cm(3) ion chamber (IC) was used to measure the radiation dose in an elliptical body-shaped phantom made of tissue-equivalent material. The IC was placed at 23 well-distributed holes in the central and peripheral regions of the phantom and dose was recorded for six acquisition protocols with different combinations of minimum kVp (109 and 125 kVp) and z-collimator aperture (full: 22.2 cm; medium: 14.0 cm; small: 8.4 cm). Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were carried out to generate complete 2D dose distributions in the central plane (z = 0). The MC model was validated at the 23 dose points against IC experimental data. The planar dose distributions were then estimated using subsets of the point dose measurements using two proposed methods: (1) the proximity-based weighting method (method 1) and (2) the dose point surface fitting method (method 2). Twenty-eight different dose point distributions with six different point number cases (4, 5, 6, 7, 14, and 23 dose points) were evaluated to determine the optimal number of dose points and their placement in the phantom. The performances of the methods were determined by comparing their results with those of the validated MC simulations. The performances of the methods in the presence of measurement uncertainties were evaluated. RESULTS: The 5-, 6-, and 7-point cases had differences below 2%, ranging from 1.0% to 1.7% for both methods, which is a performance comparable to that of the methods with a relatively large number of points, i.e., the 14- and 23-point cases. However, with the 4-point case, the performances of the two methods decreased sharply. Among the 4-, 5-, 6-, and 7-point cases, the 7-point case (1.0% [±0.6%] difference) and the 6-point case (0.7% [±0.6%] difference) performed best for method 1 and method 2, respectively. Moreover, method 2 demonstrated high-fidelity surface reconstruction with as few as 5 points, showing pixelwise absolute differences of 3.80 mGy (±0.32 mGy). Although the performance was shown to be sensitive to the phantom displacement from the isocenter, the performance changed by less than 2% for shifts up to 2 cm in the x- and y-axes in the central phantom plane. CONCLUSIONS: With as few as five points, method 1 and method 2 were able to compute the mean dose with reasonable accuracy, demonstrating differences of 1.7% (±1.2%) and 1.3% (±1.0%), respectively. A larger number of points do not necessarily guarantee better performance of the methods; optimal choice of point placement is necessary. The performance of the methods is sensitive to the alignment of the center of the body phantom relative to the isocenter. In body applications where dose distributions are important, method 2 is a better choice than method 1, as it reconstructs the dose surface with high fidelity, using as few as five points.

In vivo comparison of radiation exposure of dual-energy CT versus low-dose CT versus standard CT for imaging urinary calculi.

PURPOSE: Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) is an emerging imaging modality with the unique capability of determining urinary stone composition. This study compares radiation exposure of DECT, standard single-energy CT (SECT), and low-dose renal stone protocol single-energy CT (LDSECT) for the evaluation of nephrolithiasis in a single in vivo patient cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following institutional review board (IRB) approval, we retrospectively reviewed 200 consecutive DECT examinations performed on patients with suspected urolithiasis over a 6-month period. Of these, 35 patients had undergone examination with our LDSECT protocol, and 30 patients had undergone examination of the abdomen and pelvis with our SECT imaging protocol within 2 years of the DECT examination. The CT dose index volume (CTDIvol) was used to compare radiation exposure between scans. Image quality was objectively evaluated by comparing image noise. Statistical evaluation was performed using a Student's t-test. RESULTS: DECT performed at 80/140 kVp and 100/140 kVp did not produce a significant difference in radiation exposure compared with LDSECT (p=0.09 and 0.18, respectively). DECT performed at 80/140 kVp and 100/140 kVp produced an average 40% and 31%, respectively, reduction in radiation exposure compared with SECT (p<0.001). For patients imaged with the 100/140 kVp protocol, average values for images noise were higher in the LDSECT images compared with DECT images (p<0.001) and there was no significant difference in image noise between DECT and SECT images in the same patient (p=0.88). Patients imaged with the 80/140 kVp protocol had equivocal image noise compared with LDSECT images (p=0.44), however, DECT images had greater noise compared with SECT images in the same patient (p<0.001). Of the 75 patients included in the study, stone material was available for 16; DECT analysis correctly predicted stone composition in 15/16 patients (93%). CONCLUSION: DECT provides knowledge of stone composition in addition to the anatomic information provided by LDSECT/SECT without increasing patient radiation exposure and with minimal impact on image noise.

Radiation dose and safety: informatics standards and tools.

Quality and safety improvements in radiology and medical imaging are substantially affected by radiation dose and its relationship to image quality and patient safety. Because radiation dose has many definitions and meanings, familiarity with and understanding of the basic nuances are important; modalities in general use radiation dose metrics that differ from patient radiation dose. Dose metric data differ among CT, interventional imaging, and digital radiography modalities. Informatics standards and tools assist in the extraction, collation, and analysis of these data and are described here. An informatics infrastructure can provide a pathway to automatically track and record dose metrics individually at the patient level and collectively through a regional or national radiation dose registry. Comparison of reference dose benchmarks to local and national practice values allows personnel at a given institution to objectively evaluate and optimize imaging procedures in regard to radiation dose metrics. Ultimately, enhanced patient care and safety are achieved.

Approaches to enhancing radiation safety in cardiovascular imaging: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.

Education, justification, and optimization are the cornerstones to enhancing the radiation safety of medical imaging. Education regarding the benefits and risks of imaging and the principles of radiation safety is required for all clinicians in order for them to be able to use imaging optimally. Empowering patients with knowledge of the benefits and risks of imaging will facilitate their meaningful participation in decisions related to their health care, which is necessary to achieve patient-centered care. Limiting the use of imaging to appropriate clinical indications can ensure that the benefits of imaging outweigh any potential risks. Finally, the continually expanding repertoire of techniques that allow high-quality imaging with lower radiation exposure should be used when available to achieve safer imaging. The implementation of these strategies in practice is necessary to achieve high-quality, patient-centered imaging and will require a shared effort and investment by all stakeholders, including physicians, patients, national scientific and educational organizations, politicians, and industry.