Comparison of Virtual Non-Contrast and True Non-Contrast CT Images Obtained by Dual-Layer Spectral CT in COPD Patients.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of death. Recent studies have underlined the importance of non-contrast-enhanced chest CT scans not only for emphysema progression quantification, but for correlation with clinical outcomes as well. As about 40 percent of the 300 million CT scans per year are contrast-enhanced, no proper emphysema quantification is available in a one-stop-shop approach for patients with known or newly diagnosed COPD. Since the introduction of spectral imaging (e.g., dual-energy CT scanners), it has been possible to create virtual non-contrast-enhanced images (VNC) from contrast-enhanced images, making it theoretically possible to offer proper COPD imaging despite contrast enhancing. This study is aimed towards investigating whether these VNC images are comparable to true non-contrast-enhanced images (TNC), thereby reducing the radiation exposure of patients and usage of resources in hospitals. In total, 100 COPD patients with two scans, one with (VNC) and one without contrast media (TNC), within 8 weeks or less obtained by a spectral CT using dual-layer technology, were included in this retrospective study. TNC and VNC were compared according to their voxel-density histograms. While the comparison showed significant differences in the low attenuated volumes (LAVs) of TNC and VNC regarding the emphysema threshold of -950 Houndsfield Units (HU), the 15th and 10th percentiles of the LAVs used as a proxy for pre-emphysema were comparable. Upon further investigation, the threshold-based LAVs (-950 HU) of TNC and VNC were comparable in patients with a water equivalent diameter (DW) below 270 mm. The study concludes that VNC imaging may be a viable option for assessing emphysema progression in COPD patients, particularly those with a normal body mass index (BMI). Further, pre-emphysema was generally comparable between TNC and VNC. This approach could potentially reduce radiation exposure and hospital resources by making additional TNC scans obsolete.

Postmortem Minimally Invasive Autopsy in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients at the Bedside: A Proof-of-Concept Study at the ICU.

BACKGROUND: Economic restrictions and workforce cuts have continually challenged conventional autopsies. Recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has added tissue quality and safety requirements to the investigation of this disease, thereby launching efforts to upgrade autopsy strategies. METHODS: In this proof-of-concept study, we performed bedside ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsy (US-MIA) in the ICU of critically ill COVID-19 patients using a structured protocol to obtain non-autolyzed tissue. Biopsies were assessed for their quality (vitality) and length of biopsy (mm) and for diagnosis. The efficiency of the procedure was monitored in five cases by recording the time of each step and safety issues by swabbing personal protective equipment and devices for viral contamination. FINDINGS: Ultrasound examination and tissue procurement required a mean time period of 13 min and 54 min, respectively. A total of 318 multiorgan biopsies were obtained from five patients. Quality and vitality standards were fulfilled, which not only allowed for specific histopathological diagnosis but also the reliable detection of SARS-CoV-2 virions in unexpected organs using electronic microscopy and RNA-expressing techniques. INTERPRETATION: Bedside multidisciplinary US-MIA allows for the fast and efficient acquisition of autolytic-free tissue and offers unappreciated potential to overcome the limitations of research in postmortem studies.

Standardization of a CT Protocol for Imaging Patients with Suspected COVID-19-A RACOON Project.

CT protocols that diagnose COVID-19 vary in regard to the associated radiation exposure and the desired image quality (IQ). This study aims to evaluate CT protocols of hospitals participating in the RACOON (Radiological Cooperative Network) project, consolidating CT protocols to provide recommendations and strategies for future pandemics. In this retrospective study, CT acquisitions of COVID-19 patients scanned between March 2020 and October 2020 (RACOON phase 1) were included, and all non-contrast protocols were evaluated. For this purpose, CT protocol parameters, IQ ratings, radiation exposure (CTDIvol), and central patient diameters were sampled. Eventually, the data from 14 sites and 534 CT acquisitions were analyzed. IQ was rated good for 81% of the evaluated examinations. Motion, beam-hardening artefacts, or image noise were reasons for a suboptimal IQ. The tube potential ranged between 80 and 140 kVp, with the majority between 100 and 120 kVp. CTDIvol was 3.7 ± 3.4 mGy. Most healthcare facilities included did not have a specific non-contrast CT protocol. Furthermore, CT protocols for chest imaging varied in their settings and radiation exposure. In future, it will be necessary to make recommendations regarding the required IQ and protocol parameters for the majority of CT scanners to enable comparable IQ as well as radiation exposure for different sites but identical diagnostic questions.