Purpose
To determine the effects of iterative reconstruction (IR) and high‐frequency kernels on quantitative computed tomography (qCT) density measures at reduced X‐ray dose.
Materials and methods
...The COPDGene 2 Phantom (CTP 698, The Phantom Laboratory, Salem, NY) with four embedded lung mimicking foam densities (12lb, 20lb, and 4lb), as well as water, air, and acrylic reference inserts, was imaged using a GE 64 slice CT750 HD scanner in helical mode with four current‐time products ranging from 12 to 100 mAs. The raw acquired data were reconstructed using standard (STD — low frequency) and Bone (high frequency) kernels with filtered back projection (FBP), 100% ASiR, and Veo reconstruction algorithms. The reference density inserts were manually segmented using Slicer3D (www.slicer.org), and the mean, standard deviation, and histograms of the segmented regions were generated using Fiji (http://fiji.sc/Fiji) for each reconstruction. Measurements of threshold values placed on the cumulative frequency distribution of voxels determined by these measured histograms at 5%, PD5phant, and 15%, PD15phant, (analogous to the relative area below −950 HU (RA‐950) and percent density 15 (PD15) in human lung emphysema quantification, respectively), were also performed.
Results
The use of high‐resolution kernels in conjunction with ASiR and Veo did not significantly affect the mean Hounsfield units (HU) of each of the density standards (< 4 HU deviation) and current‐time products within the phantom when compared with the STD+FBP reconstruction conventionally used in clinical applications. A truncation of the scanner reported HU values at −1024 that shifts the mean toward more positive values was found to cause a systematic error in lower attenuating regions. Use of IR drove convergence toward the mean of measured histograms (~100–137% increase in the number measured voxels at the mean of the histogram), while the combination of Bone+ASiR preserved the standard deviation of HU values about the mean compared to STD+FBP, with the added effect of improved spatial resolution and accuracy in airway measures. PD5phant and PD15phant were most similar between the Bone+ASiR and STD+FBP in all regions except those affected by the −1024 truncation artifact.
Conclusions
Extension of the scanner reportable HU values below the present limit of −1024 will mitigate discrepancies found in qCT lung densitometry in low‐density regions. The density histogram became more sharply peaked, and standard deviation was reduced for IR, directly effecting density thresholds, PD5phant and PD15phant, placed on the cumulative frequency distribution of each region in the phantom, which serve as analogs to RA‐950 and PD15 typically used in lung density quantitation. The combination of high‐frequency kernels (Bone) with ASiR mitigates this effect and preserves density measures derived from the image histogram. Moreover, previous studies have shown improved accuracy of qCT airway measures of wall thickness (WT) and wall area percentage (WA%) when using high‐frequency kernels in combination with ASiR to better represent airway walls. The results therefore suggest an IR approach for accurate assessment of airway and parenchymal density measures in the lungs.
Purpose
Patient size‐specific dose estimate (SSDE) calculations require knowledge of a patient’s size. Errors in patient size propagate through SSDE calculations. AAPM Reports 204 and 220 recommend ...that a magnification correction be applied to patient size surrogates extracted from CT localizer radiographs. This technical note presents a novel approach for such a magnification correction.
Methods
In our model‐based magnification correction, we assume that the patient’s cross sections are elliptical with minor and major axes defined using the anterior–posterior (AP) and lateral (LAT) patient dimensions. We parameterize the problem by modeling a line emanating from the source, grazing the patient (i.e., the ellipse), and then terminating onto the detector plane. We model tangent lines on each side of the ellipse on both the LAT and AP CT localizer radiographs. We also account for vertical mispositioning with table offset. We compared our correction model to the actual AP and LAT dimensions to the vendor‐supplied CT localizer images that only received a geometric magnification correction, and to other methods described in the literature. We compare our model to the others using direct size to size comparisons as well as SSDE conversion factor.
Results
Our model‐based method provides consistent accurate results (less than 1.8% error for absolute size and 1.2% error for SSDE for all measurement conditions) for all positions and patient sizes. Existing literature‐based methods had maximum errors for absolute size and SSDE of 7.5% and 5.2%, and for the vendor, they were 30.9% and 17.0%, respectively.
Conclusion
We presented a new model‐based geometric size correction method that outperforms a simple geometric correction as well as other methods presented in the literature. By modeling the patient cross section and beam geometry using information all derived from the DICOM header and CT localizer views, we demonstrated SSDE correction factor improvements from 17.0% (vendor correction) to 1.2% (model base). These changes correspond directly into changes in SSDE itself and also represent clinically realistic patient sizes and mispositioning amounts.
CT radiation exposure has come under increasing scrutiny because of dramatically increased utilization. Multiphase CT studies (repeated scanning before and after contrast injection) are a potentially ...important, overlooked source of medically unnecessary radiation because of the dose-multiplier effect of extra phases. The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of unindicated multiphase scanning and resultant excess radiation exposure in a sample referral population.
Abdominal and pelvic CT examinations (n = 500) performed at outside institutions submitted for tertiary interpretation were retrospectively reviewed for (1) the appropriateness of each phase on the basis of clinical indication and ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) and (2) per phase and total radiation effective dose.
A total of 978 phases were performed in 500 patients; 52.8% (264 of 500) received phases that were not supported by ACR criteria. Overall, 35.8% of phases (350 of 978) were unindicated, most commonly being delayed imaging (272 of 350). The mean overall total radiation effective dose per patient was 25.8 mSv (95% confidence interval, 24.2-27.5 mSv). The mean effective dose for unindicated phases was 13.1 mSv (95% confidence interval, 12.3-14.0 mSv), resulting in a mean excess effective dose of 16.8 mSv (95% confidence interval, 15.5-18.3 mSv) per patient. Unindicated radiation constituted 33.3% of the total radiation effective dose in this population. Radiation effective doses exceeding 50 mSv were found in 21.2% of patients (106 of 500).
The results of this study suggest that a large proportion of patients undergoing abdominal and pelvic CT scanning receive unindicated additional phases that add substantial excess radiation dose with no associated clinical benefit.
While computed tomography (CT) is now commonly used and considered to be clinically valuable, significant DNA double-strand breaks (γ-H2AX foci) in white blood cells from adult and pediatric CT ...patients have been frequently reported. In this study to determine whether γ-H2AX foci and X-ray-induced naked DNA damage are suppressed by administration of the PrC-210 radioprotector, human blood samples were irradiated in a CT scanner at 50–150 mGy with or without PrC-210, and γ-H2AX foci were scored. X-ray-induced naked DNA damage was also studied, and the DNA protective efficacy of PrC-210 was compared against 12 other common “antioxidants.” PrC-210 reduced CT radiation-induced γ-H2AX foci in white blood cells to near background (P < 0.0001) at radiation doses of 50–150 mGy. PrC-210 was most effective among the 13 “antioxidants” in reducing naked DNA X-ray damage, and its addition at 30 s before an •OH pulse reduced to background the •OH insult that otherwise induced >95% DNA damage. A systemic PrC-210 dose known to confer 100% survival in irradiated mice had no discernible effect on micro-CT image signal-to-noise ratio and CT image integrity. PrC-210 suppressed DNA damage to background or near background in each of these assay systems, thus supporting its development as a radioprotector for humans in multiple radiation exposure settings.
As the COVID-19 pandemic impacts global populations, computed tomography (CT) lung imaging is being used in many countries to help manage patient care as well as to rapidly identify potentially ...useful quantitative COVID-19 CT imaging biomarkers. Quantitative COVID-19 CT imaging applications, typically based on computer vision modeling and artificial intelligence algorithms, include the potential for better methods to assess COVID-19 extent and severity, assist with differential diagnosis of COVID-19 versus other respiratory conditions, and predict disease trajectory. To help accelerate the development of robust quantitative imaging algorithms and tools, it is critical that CT imaging is obtained following best practices of the quantitative lung CT imaging community. Toward this end, the Radiological Society of North America's (RSNA) Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) CT Lung Density Profile Committee and CT Small Lung Nodule Profile Committee developed a set of best practices to guide clinical sites using quantitative imaging solutions and to accelerate the international development of quantitative CT algorithms for COVID-19. This guidance document provides quantitative CT lung imaging recommendations for COVID-19 CT imaging, including recommended CT image acquisition settings for contemporary CT scanners. Additional best practice guidance is provided on scientific publication reporting of quantitative CT imaging methods and the importance of contributing COVID-19 CT imaging datasets to open science research databases.
•Collecting CT data for quantitative COVID-19 research requires careful control of image acquisition settings.•Elevated pitch scans will improve imaging of patients with respiratory conditions.•It is important to keep respiratory level and CT image acquisition settings consistent over time.•Publication methods sections need to support image acquisition reproducibility.•Open COVID-19 CT imaging databases will accelerate the development of improved quantitative biomarkers.
To evaluate the clinical usefulness of volumetric analysis at nonenhanced computed tomography (CT) as the sole method with which to follow up endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and ...to identify endoleaks causing more than 2% volumetric increase from the previous volume determination.
The study had institutional review board approval. Images were reviewed retrospectively in a HIPAA-compliant manner for 230 CT studies in 70 patients (11 women, 59 men; mean age, 74 years) who underwent EVAR. The scannning protocol consisted of three steps: (a) contrast material-enhanced CT angiography before endovascular stent placement, (b) contrast-enhanced CT angiography 0-3 months after repair to depict immediate complications, and (c) nonenhanced CT at 3, 6, and 12 months after repair. At each follow-up visit, immediate aortic volume analysis was performed. If the interval volumetric change was 2% or less, no further imaging was performed. If the volume increased by more than 2% on the nonenhanced CT image, contrast-enhanced CT angiography was performed immediately to identify the suspected endoleak. Confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained by using bootstrapping to account for repeated measurements in the same patients.
Mean volume decrease was -3.2% (95% CI: -4.7%, -1.9%) in intervals without occurrence of a clinically relevant endoleak (n = 183). Types I and III high-pressure endoleaks (n = 10) showed a 10.0% (95% CI: 5.0%, 18.2%) interval volumetric increase. Type II low-pressure endoleaks (n = 37) showed a 5.4% (95% CI: 4.6%, 6.2%) interval volumetric increase. Endoleaks associated with minimal aortic volume increase of less than 2% did not require any intervention. This protocol reduced radiation exposure by approximately 57%-82% in an average-sized patient.
Serial volumetric analysis of aortic aneurysm with nonenhanced CT serves as an adequate screening test for endoleak, causing volumetric increase of more than 2% from the volume seen at the previous examination.
This article explains a method for creating CT protocols for a wide range of patient body sizes and clinical indications, using detailed tube current information from a small set of commonly used ...protocols. Analytical expressions were created relating CT technical acquisition parameters which can be used to create new CT protocols on a given scanner or customize protocols from one scanner to another. Plots of mA as a function of patient size for specific anatomical regions were generated and used to identify the tube output needs for patients as a function of size for a single master protocol. Tube output data were obtained from the DICOM header of clinical images from our PACS and patient size was measured from CT localizer radiographs under IRB approval. This master protocol was then used to create 11 additional master protocols. The 12 master protocols were further combined to create 39 single and multiphase clinical protocols. Radiologist acceptance rate of exams scanned using the clinical protocols was monitored for 12,857 patients to analyze the effectiveness of the presented protocol management methods using a two‐tailed Fisher's exact test. A single routine adult abdominal protocol was used as the master protocol to create 11 additional master abdominal protocols of varying dose and beam energy. Situations in which the maximum tube current would have been exceeded are presented, and the trade‐offs between increasing the effective tube output via 1) decreasing pitch, 2) increasing the scan time, or 3) increasing the kV are discussed. Out of 12 master protocols customized across three different scanners, only one had a statistically significant acceptance rate that differed from the scanner it was customized from. The difference, however, was only 1% and was judged to be negligible. All other master protocols differed in acceptance rate insignificantly between scanners. The methodology described in this paper allows a small set of master protocols to be adapted among different clinical indications on a single scanner and among different CT scanners.
PACS number: 87.57.Q
The purpose of this paper is to describe our experience with the AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline 1.a: “CT Protocol Management and Review Practice Guideline”. Specifically, we will share how ...our institution's quality management system addresses the suggestions within the AAPM practice report. We feel this paper is needed as it was beyond the scope of the AAPM practice guideline to provide specific details on fulfilling individual guidelines. Our hope is that other institutions will be able to emulate some of our practices and that this article would encourage other types of centers (e.g., community hospitals) to share their methodology for approaching CT protocol optimization and quality control. Our institution had a functioning CT protocol optimization process, albeit informal, since we began using CT. Recently, we made our protocol development and validation process compliant with a number of the ISO 9001:2008 clauses and this required us to formalize the roles of the members of our CT protocol optimization team. We rely heavily on PACS‐based IT solutions for acquiring radiologist feedback on the performance of our CT protocols and the performance of our CT scanners in terms of dose (scanner output) and the function of the automatic tube current modulation. Specific details on our quality management system covering both quality control and ongoing optimization have been provided. The roles of each CT protocol team member have been defined, and the critical role that IT solutions provides for the management of files and the monitoring of CT protocols has been reviewed. In addition, the invaluable role management provides by being a champion for the project has been explained; lack of a project champion will mitigate the efforts of a CT protocol optimization team. Meeting the guidelines set forth in the AAPM practice guideline was not inherently difficult, but did, in our case, require the cooperation of radiologists, technologists, physicists, IT, administrative staff, and hospital management. Some of the IT solutions presented in this paper are novel and currently unique to our institution.
PACS number: 87.57.Q
PDF
