Virtual unenhanced images derived from dual-energy computed tomography for assessing bone mineral density and detecting osteoporosis

BACKGROUND: The early detection and treatment of osteoporosis can help prevent osteoporosis-related fractures, especially in patients who undergo enhanced computed tomography (CT) scans for disease diagnosis or evaluation of treatment outcomes. Although Hounsfield unit (HU) measurement of the vertebral body has been shown to have a strong positive correlation with bone mineral density (BMD), the contrast media will impact the CT value of the vertebral body and decrease the accuracy. This study is aimed to examine the distinctions in vertebral body CT attenuation measurement on true unenhanced (TUE) and virtual unenhanced (VUE) images generated from triphasic enhanced dual-energy CT (DECT) scans and to determine the feasibility of assessing BMD and detecting osteoporosis on VUE images as compared to quantitative CT (QCT). METHODS: A total of 235 patients underwent abdominal CT examinations that included unenhanced (with 120 kVp and Smart mA) and triphasic enhanced DECT scans. The BMD and CT attenuation values of the L1–L2 vertebrae were measured on TUE and VUE images reconstructed from the triphasic enhanced CT. The differences and associations between TUE and VUE generated from triphasic enhanced CT were analyzed. The diagnostic performances of HU measurements obtained from TUE and VUE images were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: The BMD and HU measurements of the vertebrae showed good interobserver repeatability on both TUE and VUE images (all intercorrelation coefficients >0.92). The CT attenuation values of L1 and L2 and their average value showed no statistically significant difference among the triphasic VUE images (F=0.121, F=0.061, F=0.090; all P values >0.05) but were significantly lower than those obtained from the TUE images. HU measurements in both the TUE and triphasic VUE images, along with the reference BMD derived from QCT, demonstrated a strong positive correlation (r(TUE) =0.981, r(VUEa) =0.966, r(VUEv) =0.962, r(VUEd) =0.964; all P values <0.05), with excellent diagnostic performance for the diagnoses of osteoporosis and osteopenia (all areas under curve >0.95). The Bland-Altman scatter plot exhibited good agreement, as the deviations between the reference BMD and the calculated BMD were evenly distributed around 0. CONCLUSIONS: Although the attenuation values of the vertebrae on the VUE images were underestimated compared to those on the TUE images, the HU measurement on VUE image was effective in assessing BMD and detecting osteoporosis and osteopenia with good diagnostic performance.