Cargando…
Image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of images obtained using single-energy computed tomography (SECT) performed with automated tube voltage adaptation (TVA) with dual-energy CT (DECT) weighted average images. METHODS: Eighty patients were prospectively randomized to undergo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35441839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08689-4 |
_version_ | 1784832025678577664 |
---|---|
author | Bedernik, Andreas Wuest, Wolfgang May, Matthias Stefan Heiss, Rafael Uder, Michael Wiesmueller, Marco |
author_facet | Bedernik, Andreas Wuest, Wolfgang May, Matthias Stefan Heiss, Rafael Uder, Michael Wiesmueller, Marco |
author_sort | Bedernik, Andreas |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of images obtained using single-energy computed tomography (SECT) performed with automated tube voltage adaptation (TVA) with dual-energy CT (DECT) weighted average images. METHODS: Eighty patients were prospectively randomized to undergo either SECT with TVA (n = 40, ref. mAs 200) or radiation dose–matched DECT (n = 40, 80/Sn150 kV, ref. mAs tube A 91/tube B 61) on a dual-source CT scanner. Objective image quality was evaluated as dose-normalized contrast-to-noise ratio (CNRD) for the jugular veins relative to fatty tissue and muscle tissue and for muscle tissue relative to fatty issue. For subjective image quality, reproduction of anatomical structures, image artifacts, image noise, spatial resolution, and overall diagnostic acceptability were evaluated at sixteen anatomical substructures using Likert-type scales. RESULTS: Effective radiation dose (ED) was comparable between SECT and DECT study groups (2.9 ± 0.6 mSv/3.1 ± 0.7 mSv, p = 0.5). All examinations were rated as excellent or good for clinical diagnosis. Compared to the CNRD in the SECT group, the CNRD in the DECT group was significantly higher for the jugular veins relative to fatty tissue (7.51/6.08, p < 0.001) and for muscle tissue relative to fatty tissue (4.18/2.90, p < 0.001). The CNRD for the jugular veins relative to muscle tissue (3.33/3.18, p = 0.51) was comparable between groups. Image artifacts were less pronounced and overall diagnostic acceptability was higher in the DECT group (all p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: DECT weighted average images deliver higher objective and subjective image quality than SECT performed with TVA in head and neck imaging. KEY POINTS: • Weighted average images derived from dual-energy CT deliver higher objective and subjective image quality than single-energy CT using automated tube voltage adaptation in head and neck imaging. • If available, dual-energy CT acquisition may be preferred over automated low tube voltage adopted single-energy CT for both malignant and non-malignant conditions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9668949 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96689492022-11-18 Image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study Bedernik, Andreas Wuest, Wolfgang May, Matthias Stefan Heiss, Rafael Uder, Michael Wiesmueller, Marco Eur Radiol Head and Neck OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of images obtained using single-energy computed tomography (SECT) performed with automated tube voltage adaptation (TVA) with dual-energy CT (DECT) weighted average images. METHODS: Eighty patients were prospectively randomized to undergo either SECT with TVA (n = 40, ref. mAs 200) or radiation dose–matched DECT (n = 40, 80/Sn150 kV, ref. mAs tube A 91/tube B 61) on a dual-source CT scanner. Objective image quality was evaluated as dose-normalized contrast-to-noise ratio (CNRD) for the jugular veins relative to fatty tissue and muscle tissue and for muscle tissue relative to fatty issue. For subjective image quality, reproduction of anatomical structures, image artifacts, image noise, spatial resolution, and overall diagnostic acceptability were evaluated at sixteen anatomical substructures using Likert-type scales. RESULTS: Effective radiation dose (ED) was comparable between SECT and DECT study groups (2.9 ± 0.6 mSv/3.1 ± 0.7 mSv, p = 0.5). All examinations were rated as excellent or good for clinical diagnosis. Compared to the CNRD in the SECT group, the CNRD in the DECT group was significantly higher for the jugular veins relative to fatty tissue (7.51/6.08, p < 0.001) and for muscle tissue relative to fatty tissue (4.18/2.90, p < 0.001). The CNRD for the jugular veins relative to muscle tissue (3.33/3.18, p = 0.51) was comparable between groups. Image artifacts were less pronounced and overall diagnostic acceptability was higher in the DECT group (all p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: DECT weighted average images deliver higher objective and subjective image quality than SECT performed with TVA in head and neck imaging. KEY POINTS: • Weighted average images derived from dual-energy CT deliver higher objective and subjective image quality than single-energy CT using automated tube voltage adaptation in head and neck imaging. • If available, dual-energy CT acquisition may be preferred over automated low tube voltage adopted single-energy CT for both malignant and non-malignant conditions. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-04-20 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9668949/ /pubmed/35441839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08689-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Head and Neck Bedernik, Andreas Wuest, Wolfgang May, Matthias Stefan Heiss, Rafael Uder, Michael Wiesmueller, Marco Image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study |
title | Image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study |
title_full | Image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study |
title_fullStr | Image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study |
title_full_unstemmed | Image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study |
title_short | Image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study |
title_sort | image quality comparison of single-energy and dual-energy computed tomography for head and neck patients: a prospective randomized study |
topic | Head and Neck |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35441839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08689-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bedernikandreas imagequalitycomparisonofsingleenergyanddualenergycomputedtomographyforheadandneckpatientsaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT wuestwolfgang imagequalitycomparisonofsingleenergyanddualenergycomputedtomographyforheadandneckpatientsaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT maymatthiasstefan imagequalitycomparisonofsingleenergyanddualenergycomputedtomographyforheadandneckpatientsaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT heissrafael imagequalitycomparisonofsingleenergyanddualenergycomputedtomographyforheadandneckpatientsaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT udermichael imagequalitycomparisonofsingleenergyanddualenergycomputedtomographyforheadandneckpatientsaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT wiesmuellermarco imagequalitycomparisonofsingleenergyanddualenergycomputedtomographyforheadandneckpatientsaprospectiverandomizedstudy |