Ultra-high-resolution photon-counting detector computed tomography of the lungs: Phantom and clinical assessment of radiation dose and image quality.

PURPOSE: Photon-counting-detector computed tomography (PCD-CT) offers enhanced noise reduction, spatial resolution, and image quality in comparison to energy-integrated-detectors CT (EID-CT). These hypothesized improvements were compared using PCD-CT ultra-high (UHR) and standard-resolution (SR) scan-modes. METHODS: Phantom scans were obtained with both EID-CT and PCD-CT (UHR, SR) on an adult body-phantom. Radiation dose was measured and noise levels were compared at a minimum achievable slice thickness of 0.5 mm for EID-CT, 0.2 mm for PCD-CT-UHR and 0.4 mm for PCD-CT-SR. Signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were calculated for five tissue densities. Additionally, data from 25 patients who had PCD-CT of chest were reconstructed at 1 mm and 0.2 mm (UHR) slice-thickness and compared quantitatively (SNR) and qualitatively (noise, quality, sharpness, bone details). RESULTS: Phantom PCD-CT-UHR and PCD-CT-SR scans had similar measured radiation dose (16.0mGy vs 15.8 mGy). Phantom PCD-CT-SR (0.4 mm) had lower noise level in comparison to EID-CT (0.5 mm) (9.0HU vs 9.6HU). PCD-CT-UHR (0.2 mm) had slightly higher noise level (11.1HU). Phantom PCD-CT-SR (0.4 mm) had higher SNR in comparison to EID-CT (0.5 mm) while achieving higher resolution (Bone 115 vs 96, Acrylic 14 vs 14, Polyethylene 11 vs 10). SNR was slightly lower across all densities for PCD-CT UHR (0.2 mm). Interestingly, CNR was highest in the 0.2 mm PCD-CT group; PCD-CT CNR was 2.45 and 2.88 times the CNR for 0.5 mm EID-CT for acrylic and poly densities. Clinical comparison of SNR showed predictably higher SNR for 1 mm (30.3 ± 10.7 vs 14.2 ± 7, p = 0.02). Median subjective ratings were higher for 0.2 mm UHR vs 1 mm PCD-CT for nodule contour (4.6 ± 0.3 vs 3.6 ± 0.1, p = 0.02), bone detail (5 ± 0 vs 4 ± 0.1, p = 0.001), image quality (5 ± 0.1 vs 4.6 ± 0.4, p = 0.001), and sharpness (5 ± 0.1 vs 4 ± 0.2). CONCLUSION: Both UHR and SR PCD-CT result in similar radiation dose levels. PCD-CT can achieve higher resolution with lower noise level in comparison to EID-CT.

Non-contrast computed tomography findings for identification of chronically occluded coronary artery bypass grafts.

BACKGROUND: Detecting occlusions of coronary artery bypass grafts using non-contrast computed tomography (CT) series is understudied and underestimated. PURPOSE: To evaluate morphological findings for the diagnosis of chronic coronary artery bypass graft occlusion on non-contrast CT and investigate performance statistics for potential use cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-three patients with coronary artery bypass grafts who had CT angiography of the chest (non-contrast and arterial phases) were retrospectively included. Two readers applied pre-set morphologic findings to assess the patency of a bypass graft on non-contrast series. These findings included vessel shape (linear-band like), collapsed lumen and surgical graft marker without a visible vessel. Performance was tested using the simultaneously acquired arterial phase series as the ground truth. RESULTS: The per-patient diagnostic accuracy for occlusion was 0.890 (95% confidence interval = 0.795-0.951). Venous grafts overall had an 88% accuracy. None of the left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending artery arterial graft occlusions were detected. The negative likelihood ratio for an occluded graft that is truly patent was 0.121, demonstrating a true post-test probability of 97% for identifying a patent graft as truly patent given a prevalence of 20% occlusion at a median 8.4 years post-surgery. Neither years post-surgery, nor number of vessels was associated with a significant decrease in reader accuracy. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of coronary bypass grafts for chronic occlusion on non-contrast CT based off vessel morphology is feasible and accurate for venous grafts. Potential use cases include low-intermediate risk patients with chest pain or shortness of breath for whom non-contrast CT was ordered, or administration of iodine-based contrast is contraindicated.