Using 80 kVp on a 320-row scanner for hepatic multiphasic CT reduces the contrast dose by 50 % in patients at risk for contrast-induced nephropathy.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the effects of a low contrast material (CM) dose protocol using 80-kVp on the image quality of hepatic multiphasic CT scans acquired on a 320-row CT scanner. METHODS: We scanned 30 patients with renal insufficiency (eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2) using 80-kVp and a CM dose of 300mgI/kg. Another 30 patients without renal insufficiency (eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were scanned with the conventional 120-kVp protocol and the standard CM dose of 600mgI/kg. Quantitative image quality parameters, i.e. CT attenuation, image noise, and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were compared and the visual image quality was scored on a four-point scale. The volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and the size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) recorded with the 80- and the 120-kVp protocols were also compared. RESULTS: Image noise and contrast enhancement were equivalent for the two protocols. There was no significant difference in the CNR of all anatomic sites and in the visual scores for overall image quality. The CTDIvol and SSDE were approximately 25-30 % lower under the 80-kVp protocol. CONCLUSION: Hepatic multiphase CT using 80-kVp on a 320-row CT scanner allowed for a decrease in the CM dose and a reduction in the radiation dose without image quality degradation in patients with renal insufficiency. KEY POINTS: • The 80-kVp CT protocol enabled reduction of contrast dose by 50 % • The 80-kVp CT protocol reduced the radiation dose by 25-33 % • There was no degradation in the image quality of the 80-kVp protocol.

[Reduction of radiation exposure and image quality using dose reduction tool on computed tomography fluoroscopy].

The purpose of our study was to measure the reduction rate of radiation dose and variability of image noise using the angular beam modulation (ABM) on computed tomography (CT) fluoroscopy. The Alderson-Rando phantom and the homemade phantom were used in our study. These phantoms were scanned at on-center and off-center positions at -12 cm along y-axis with and without ABM technique. Regarding the technique, the x-ray tube is turned off in a 100-degree angle sector at the center of 12 o'clock, 10 o'clock, and 2 o'clock positions during CT fluoroscopy. CT fluoroscopic images were obtained with tube voltages, 120 kV; tube current-time product per reconstructed image, 30 mAs; rotation time, 0.5 s/rot; slice thickness, 4.8 mm; and reconstruction kernel B30s in each scanning. After CT scanning, radiation exposure and image noise were measured and the image artifacts were evaluated with and without the technique. The reduction rate for radiation exposure was 75-80% with and without the technique at on-center position regardless of each angle position. In the case of the off-center position at -12 cm, the reduction rate was 50% with and without the technique. In contrast, image noise remained constant with and without the technique. Visual inspection for image artifacts almost have the same scores with and without the technique and no statistical significance was found in both techniques (p>0.05). ABM is an appropriate tool for reducing radiation exposure and maintaining image-noise and artifacts during CT fluoroscopy.

Dual-region-of-interest bolus-tracking technique for coronary computed tomographic angiography on a 320-row scanner: reduction in the interpatient variability of arterial contrast enhancement.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the effect of a dual-region-of-interest (ROI) bolus-tracking technique on interpatient variability of arterial contrast enhancement with that of the conventional bolus-tracking technique in coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) on a 320-row scanner. METHODS: This study included 100 patients who underwent coronary CTA using one of two protocols: (1) 50 patients underwent scanning using a conventional single-ROI bolus-tracking technique (P-single) with an ROI placed in the ascending aorta, and (2) 50 patients underwent scanning using a dual-ROI technique (P-dual) with two ROIs placed in the pulmonary trunk and the ascending aorta. CT attenuation in the ascending aorta and coronary arteries, and the interpatient variability were compared between the two scanning protocols. RESULTS: The mean CT attenuation of the ascending aorta and coronary arteries tended to be higher for P-dual than for P-single, but the difference was not significant (p = 0.08-0.30). The interpatient variability of contrast enhancement (SD of the CT attenuation) was significantly smaller for P-dual than for P-single (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The dual-ROI bolus-tracking technique can reduce interpatient variability of arterial contrast enhancement in coronary CTA on a 320-row scanner. Advances in knowledge: The use of a dual-ROI bolus-tracking technique can provide sufficient and consistent arterial enhancement of coronary CTA.

Contrast enhancement in abdominal computed tomography: influence of photon energy of different scanners.

OBJECTIVE: Different CT scanners have different X-ray spectra and photon energies indicating that contrast enhancement vary among scanners. However, this issue has not been fully validated; therefore, we performed phantom and clinical studies to assess this difference. METHODS: Two scanners were used: scanner-A and scanner-B. In the phantom study, we compared the contrast enhancement between the scanners at tube voltage peaks of 80, 100 and 120 kVp. Then, we calculated the effective energies of the two CT scanners. In the clinical study, 40 patients underwent abdominal scanning with scanner-A and another 40 patients with scanner-B, with each group using the same scanning protocol. The contrast enhancement of abdominal organs was assessed quantitatively (based on the absolute difference between the attenuation of unenhanced scans and contrast-enhanced scans) and qualitatively. A two-tailed independent Student's t-test and or the Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare the discrepancies. RESULTS: In the phantom study, contrast enhancement for scanner-B was 36.9, 32.6 and 30.8% higher than that for scanner-A at 80, 100 and 120 kVp, respectively. The effective energies were higher for scanner-A than for scanner-B. In the quantitative analysis for the clinical study, scanner-B yielded significantly better contrast enhancement of the hepatic parenchyma, pancreas, kidney, portal vein and inferior vena cava compared with that of scanner-A. The mean visual scores for contrast enhancement were also significantly higher on images obtained by scanner-B than those by scanner-A. CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in contrast enhancement of the abdominal organs between the compared CT scanners from two different vendors even at the same scanning and contrast parameters. Advances in knowledge: Awareness of the impact of different X-ray energies on the resultant attenuation of contrast material is important when interpreting clinical CT images.

Low contrast and radiation dose coronary CT angiography using a 320-row system and a refined contrast injection and timing method.

BACKGROUND: Among CT scanners, 320-row instruments feature decreased photon energy and yield strong contrast enhancement. Consequently, the contrast medium (CM) dose can be reduced. The results of low-tube-voltage coronary CT angiography (CCTA) performed on 320-row scanners have not been adequately assessed. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effects of a low-contrast-dose protocol on the image quality of CCTA using 80 kVp tube voltage, iterative reconstruction (IR), and a 320-row scanner. METHODS: We randomly assigned 90 patients (mean body weight, 56.5 ± 11.0 kg) to 1 of 3 CCTA protocols. Under protocol A, 30 were scanned using a conventional 120-kVp protocol and a standard CM dose (280 mg iodine/kg body weight [mgI/kg]). Another 30 underwent scanning at 80 kVp with a 25% CM dose reduction (210 mgI/kg; protocol B). Under protocol C, the remaining 30 patients were scanned at 80 kVp with a 50% CM dose reduction (140 mgI/kg). The 120 and 80 kVp images were processed with IR. Images obtained under the 3 protocols were subjected to quantitative and qualitative analysis. RESULTS: The amount of CM used in protocol A, B, and C was 43.6 ± 10.1, 30.3 ± 4.4, and 21.0 ± 4.0 mL, respectively. Mean CT attenuation of the coronary arteries tended to be higher under protocol B than the other 2 protocols. The contrast-to-noise ratio was significantly higher under protocol B. The mean visual scores were significantly higher for protocols A and B than protocol C. The mean effective radiation dose was significantly lower under the 80-kVp protocol. CONCLUSION: With a 320-row scanner and our refined CM injection and timing protocol, it is technically feasible to obtain sufficient vascular enhancement with a reduction in the CM and/or radiation dose at 80-kVp CCTA with IR.

Validity of the size-specific dose estimate in adults undergoing coronary CT angiography: comparison with the volume CT dose index.

Size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) takes into account the patient size but remains to be fully validated for adult coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). We investigated the appropriateness of SSDE for accurate estimation of patient dose by comparing the SSDE and the volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) in adult CCTA. This prospective study received institutional review board approval, and informed consent was obtained from each patient. We enrolled 37 adults who underwent CCTA with a 320-row CT. High-sensitivity metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor dosimeters were placed on the anterior chest. CTDIvol reported by the scanner based on a 32-cm phantom was recorded. We measured chest diameter to convert CTDIvol to SSDE. Using linear regression, we then correlated SSDE with the mean measured skin dose. We also performed linear regression analyses between the skin dose/CTDIvol and the body mass index (BMI), and the skin dose/SSDE and BMI. There was a strong linear correlation (r = 0.93, P < 0.001) between SSDE (mean 37 ± 22 mGy) and mean skin dose (mean 17.7 ± 10 mGy). There was a moderate negative correlation between the skin dose/CTDIvol and BMI (r = 0.45, P < 0.01). The skin dose/SSDE was not affected by BMI (r = 0.06, P > 0.76). SSDE yields a more accurate estimation of the radiation dose without estimation errors attributable to the body size of adult patients undergoing CCTA.