RESUMO
Background Spatial resolution, soft-tissue contrast, and dose-efficient capabilities of photon-counting CT (PCCT) potentially allow a better quality and diagnostic confidence of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) in comparison to conventional CT. Purpose To compare the quality of CCTA scans obtained with a clinical prototype PCCT system and an energy-integrating detector (EID) dual-layer CT (DLCT) system. Materials and Methods In this prospective board-approved study with informed consent, participants with coronary artery disease underwent retrospective electrocardiographically gated CCTA with both systems after injection of 65-75 mL of 400 mg/mL iodinated contrast agent at 5 mL/sec. A prior phantom task-based quality assessment of the detectability index of coronary lesions was performed. Ultra-high-resolution parameters were used for PCCT (1024 matrix, 0.25-mm section thickness) and EID DLCT (512 matrix, 0.67-mm section thickness). Three cardiac radiologists independently performed a blinded analysis using a five-point quality score (1 = insufficient, 5 = excellent) for overall image quality, diagnostic confidence, and diagnostic quality of calcifications, stents, and noncalcified plaques. A logistic regression model, adjusted for radiologists, was used to evaluate the proportion of improvement in scores with the best method. Results Fourteen consecutive participants (12 men; mean age, 61 years ± 17) were enrolled. Scores of overall quality and diagnostic confidence were higher with PCCT images with a median of 5 (interquartile range [IQR], 2) and 5 (IQR, 1) versus 4 (IQR, 1) and 4 (IQR, 3) with EID DLCT images, using a mean tube current of 255 mAs ± 0 versus 349 mAs ± 111 for EID DLCT images (P < .01). Proportions of improvement with PCCT images for quality of calcification, stent, and noncalcified plaque were 100%, 92% (95% CI: 71, 98), and 45% (95% CI: 28, 63), respectively. In the phantom study, detectability indexes were 2.3-fold higher for lumen and 2.9-fold higher for noncalcified plaques with PCCT images. Conclusion Coronary CT angiography with a photon-counting CT system demonstrated in humans an improved image quality and diagnostic confidence compared with an energy-integrating dual-layer CT. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Sandfort and Bluemke in this issue.
Assuntos
Angiografia por Tomografia Computadorizada , Fótons , Angiografia por Tomografia Computadorizada/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X/métodosRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to compare the image quality of in vivo coronary stents between an energy integrating detectors dual-layer computed tomography (EID-DLCT) and a clinical prototype of spectral photon counting computed tomography (SPCCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In January to June 2021, consecutive patients with coronary stents were prospectively enrolled to undergo a coronary computed tomography (CT) with an EID-DLCT (IQon, Philips) and an SPCCT (Philips). The study was approved by the local ethical committee and patients signed an informed consent. A retrospectively electrocardiogram-gated acquisition was performed with optimized matching parameters on the 2 scanners (EID-DLCT: collimation, 64 × 0.625 mm; kVp, 120, automatic exposure control with target current at 255 mAs; rotation time, 0.27 seconds; SPCCT: collimation, 64 × 0.275 mm; kVp, 120; mAs, 255; rotation time, 0.33 seconds). The injection protocol was the same on both scanners: 65 to 75 mL of Iomeron (Bracco) at 5 mL/s. Images were reconstructed with slice thickness of 0.67 mm, 512 matrix, XCB (Xres cardiac standard) and XCD (Xres cardiac detailed) kernel, iDose 3 for EID-DLCT and 0.25-mm slice thickness, 1024 matrix, Detailed 2 and Sharp kernel, and iDose 6 for SPCCT. Two experienced observers measured the proximal and distal external and internal diameters of the stents to quantify blooming artifacts. Regions of interest were drawn in the lumen of the stent and of the upstream coronary artery. The difference (Δ S-C) between the respective attenuation values was calculated as a quantification of stent-induced artifacts on intrastent image quality. For subjective image quality, 3 experienced observers graded with a 4-point scale the image quality of different parameters: coronary wall before the stent, stent lumen, stent structure, calcifications surrounding the stent, and beam-hardening artifacts. RESULTS: Eight patients (age, 68 years [interquartile range, 8]; all men; body mass index, 26.2 kg/m2 [interquartile range, 4.2]) with 16 stents were scanned. Five stents were not evaluable owing to motion artifacts on the SPCCT. Of the remaining, all were drug eluting stents, of which 6 were platinum-chromium, 3 were cobalt-platinum-iridium, and 1 was stainless steel. For 1 stent, no information could be retrieved. Radiation dose was lower with the SPCCT (fixed CT dose index of 25.7 mGy for SPCCT vs median CT dose index of 35.7 [IQ = 13.6] mGy; P = 0.02). For 1 stent, the internal diameter was not assessable on EID-DLCT. External diameters were smaller and internal diameters were larger with SPCCT (all P < 0.05). Consequently, blooming artifacts were reduced on SPCCT (P < 0.05). Whereas Hounsfield unit values within the coronary arteries on the 2 scanners were similar, the Δ S-C was lower for SPCCT-Sharp as compared with EID-DLCT-XCD and SPCCT-Detailed 2 (P < 0.05). The SPCCT received higher subjective scores than EID-DLCT for stent lumen, stent structure, surrounding calcifications and beam-hardening for both Detailed 2 and Sharp (all P ≤ 0.05). The SPCCT-Sharp was judged better for stent structure and beam-hardening assessment as compared with SPCCT-Detailed 2. CONCLUSION: Spectral photon counting CT demonstrated improved objective and subjective image quality as compared with EID-DLCT for the evaluation of coronary stents even with a reduced radiation dose.