A Method for Reducing Variability Across Dual-Energy CT Manufacturers in Quantification of Low Iodine Content Levels.

BACKGROUND. Clinical use of the dual-energy CT (DECT) iodine quantification technique is hindered by between-platform (i.e., across different manufacturers) variability in iodine concentration (IC) values, particularly at low iodine levels. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to develop in an anthropomorphic phantom a method for reducing between-platform variability in quantification of low iodine content levels using DECT and to evaluate the method's performance in patients undergoing serial clinical DECT examinations on different platforms. METHODS. An anthropomorphic phantom in three body sizes, incorporating varied lesion types and scanning conditions, was imaged with three distinct DECT implementations from different manufacturers at varying radiation exposures. A cross-platform iodine quantification model for correcting between-platform variability at low iodine content was developed using the phantom data. The model was tested in a retrospective series of 30 patients (20 men, 10 women; median age, 62 years) who each underwent three serial contrast-enhanced DECT examinations of the abdomen and pelvis (90 scans total) for routine oncology surveillance using the same three DECT platforms as in the phantom. Estimated accuracy of phantom IC values was summarized using root-mean-square error (RMSE) relative to known IC. Between-platform variability in patients was summarized using root-mean-square deviation (RMSD). RMSE and RMSD were compared between platform-based IC (ICPB) and cross-platform IC (ICCP). ICPB was normalized to aorta and portal vein. RESULTS. In the phantom study, mean RMSE of ICPB across platforms and other experimental conditions was 0.65 ± 0.18 mg I/mL compared with 0.40 ± 0.08 mg I/mL for ICCP (38% decrease in mean RMSE; p < .05). Intrapatient between-platform variability across serial DECT examinations was higher for ICPB than ICCP (RMSD, 97% vs 88%; p < .001). Between-platform variability was not reduced by normalization of ICPB to aorta (RMSD, 97% vs 101%; p = .12) or portal vein (RMSD, 97% vs 97%; p = .81). CONCLUSION. The developed cross-platform method significantly decreased between-platform variability occurring at low iodine content with platform-based DECT iodine quantification. CLINICAL IMPACT. With further validation, the cross-platform method, which has been implemented as a web-based app, may expand clinical use of DECT iodine quantification, yielding meaningful IC values that reflect tissue biologic viability or treatment response in patients who undergo serial examinations on different platforms.

Virtual Unenhanced Dual-Energy CT Images Obtained with a Multimaterial Decomposition Algorithm: Diagnostic Value for Renal Mass and Urinary Stone Evaluation.

Background Virtual unenhanced (VUE) images obtained by using a dual-energy CT (DECT) multimaterial decomposition algorithm hold promise for diagnostic use in the abdomen in lieu of true unenhanced (TUE) images. Purpose To assess VUE images obtained from a DECT multimaterial decomposition algorithm in patients undergoing renal mass and urinary stone evaluation. Materials and Methods In this retrospective Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study, DECT was performed in patients undergoing evaluation for renal mass or urinary stone. VUE images were compared quantitatively to TUE images and qualitatively assessed by four independent radiologists. Differences in attenuation between VUE and TUE images were summarized by using 95% limits of agreement. Diagnostic performance in urinary stone detection was summarized by using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity. Results A total of 221 patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 61 years ± 14; 129 men) with 273 renal masses were evaluated. Differences in renal mass attenuation between VUE and TUE images were within 3 HU for both enhancing masses (95% limits of agreement, -3.1 HU to 2.7 HU) and nonenhancing cysts (95% limits of agreement, -2.9 HU to 2.5 HU). Renal mass classification as enhancing mass versus nonenhancing cyst did not change (reclassification rate of enhancing masses, 0% [0 of 78]; 95% CI: 0, 5; reclassification rate of nonenhancing cysts, 0% [0 of 193]; 95% CI: 0, 2) with use of VUE in lieu of TUE images. Among 166 urinary stones evaluated, diagnostic performance of VUE images for stone detection was lower compared with that of TUE images (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.79 [95% CI: 0.73, 0.84] vs 0.93 [95% CI: 0.91, 0.95]; P < .001) due to reduced sensitivity of VUE for detection of stones 3 mm in diameter or less compared with those greater than 3 mm (sensitivity, 23% [25 of 108; 95% CI: 12, 40] vs 88% [126 of 144; 95% CI: 77, 94]; P < .001). Conclusion Compared with true unenhanced images, virtual unenhanced (VUE) images were unlikely to change renal mass classification as enhancing mass versus nonenhancing cyst. Diagnostic performance of VUE images remained suboptimal for urinary stone detection due to subtraction of stones 3 mm or less in diameter. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Sosna in this issue.

Frequency and Outcomes of Incidental Breast Lesions Detected on Abdominal MRI Over a 7-Year Period.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the frequency and outcomes of incidental breast lesions detected on abdominal MRI examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Abdominal MRI reports for 11,462 women imaged at our institution from November 2007 through December 2014 were reviewed to identify those reporting an incidental breast lesion. Available breast imaging and pathology results were assessed to identify outcomes in these lesions. RESULTS: Incidental breast lesions were described in the MRI reports of 292 (3%) patients who underwent abdominal MRI during the study period; breast imaging was recommended for 192 of these 292 (66%) patients. Sixty-three of the 192 (33%) patients for whom follow-up breast imaging was recommended underwent such imaging at our institution. Twenty-one of these 63 (33%) lesions underwent biopsy or surgery; histologic sampling of these lesions yielded seven incidental cancers (invasive ductal, n = 6; invasive lobular, n = 1) and 14 benign diagnoses. Three additional cancers (invasive ductal, n = 2; invasive lobular, n = 1) and three benign diagnoses were discovered at pathology at outside institutions. Of the remaining 165 patients without a histologic diagnosis, the lesions in 95 (58%) patients were presumed to be benign because of stability over time. Seven of the 10 patients with a diagnosis of incidental cancer (age range, 53-86 years; mean ± SD, 67.0 ± 10.6 years) had not undergone screening mammography at our institution. The frequency of incidental breast cancer was 11% of patients subsequently undergoing follow-up breast imaging at our institution, 3% of all patients with reported breast lesions, and 0.09% of patients undergoing abdominal MRI examinations. CONCLUSION: Although incidental breast lesions were rarely detected on abdominal MRI, a considerable number of these lesions were found to represent breast cancer, particularly when leading to a recommendation for follow-up breast imaging. Therefore, it is important for radiologists interpreting abdominal MRI examinations to carefully evaluate for the presence of breast abnormalities.