Iodine quantification using dual-energy multidetector computed tomography imaging: Phantom study assessing the impact of iterative reconstruction schemes and patient habitus on accuracy

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 47, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 656-661

  Feuerlein, Sebastian ^a   Heye, Tobias J ^a   Bashir, Mustafa R ^a   Boll, Daniel T ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

contrast agent; Dual energy CT; quantitative CT

Indexed keywords

IODINE;

ARTICLE; BLADDER; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENSITY; DUAL ENERGY MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; KIDNEY COLLECTING TUBULE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NOISE REDUCTION; OBESITY; PARENCHYMA; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; STUDENT T TEST; VASCULARIZATION;

EID: 84867255864     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31826585bb     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Israel GM, Bosniak MA. Renal imaging for diagnosis and staging of renal cell carcinoma. Urol Clin North Am. 2003;30:499-514.
2. Neville AM, Gupta RT, Miller CM, et al. Detection of renal lesion enhancement with dual-energy multidetector CT. Radiology. 2011;259:173-183.
3. Siegel CL, Fisher AJ, Bennett HF. Interobserver variability in determining enhancement of renal masses on helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172: 1207-1212.
4. Israel GM, Bosniak MA. How I do it: evaluating renal masses. Radiology. 2005;236:441-450.
5. Maki DD, Birnbaum BA, Chakraborty DP, et al. Renal c-St pseudoenhancement: beam-hardening effects on CT numbers. Radiology. 1999;213:468-472.
6. Sangwaiya MJ, Boland GW, Cronin CG, et al. Incidental adrenal lesions: accuracy of characterization with contrast-enhanced washout multidetector CTV10-minute dela-ed imaging protocol revisited in a large patient cohort. Radiology. 2010;256:504-510.
7. Blake MA, Kalra MK, SweeneyAT, et al. Distinguishing benign from malignant adrenal masses: multi-detector row CT protocol with 10-minute delay. Radiology. 2006;238:578-585.
8. Szolar DH, Korobkin M, Reittner P, et al. Adrenocortical carcinomas and adrenal pheochromocytomas: mass and enhancement loss evaluation at dela-ed contrast-enhanced CT. Radiology. 2005;234:479-485.
9. Apfaltrer P, Me-er M, Meier C, et al. Contrast-enhanced dual-energy CT of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: is iodine-related attenuation a potential indicator of tumor response? Invest Radiol. 2012;47:65-70.
10. Li M, Zheng X, Li J, et al. Dual-energy computed tomography imaging of thyroid nodule specimens: comparison with pathologic findings. Invest Radiol. 2012;47:58-64.
11. Coursey CA, Nelson RC, Boll DT, et al. Dual-energy multidetector CT: how does it work, what can it tell us, and when can we use it in abdominopelvic imaging? Radiographics. 2010;30:1037-1055.
12. He-e T, Nelson RC, Ho LM, et al. Dual-energy applications in the abdomen. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199:S1-S7.
13. Brown CL, Hartman RP, Dzyubak OP, et al. Dual-energy CT iodine overlay technique for characterization of renal masses as c-St or solid: a phantom feasibility study. Eur Radiol. 2009;19:1289-1295.
14. Miller CM, Gupta RT, Paulson EK, et al. Impact of organ enhancement and body habitus on estimation of noncontrast attenuation from contrast-enhanced dualenergy MDCT: concepts for individualized and organ-specific spectral iodine subtraction strategies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:W558YW564.
15. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology. 2010;257:373-383.
16. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Kambadakone AK, et al. Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol. 2010;45:202-210.
17. Sagara Y, Hara AK, Pavlicek W, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection in 53 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195: 713-719.
18. Petersilka M, Bruder H, Krauss B, et al. Technical principles of dual source CT. Eur J Radiol. 2008;68:362-368.
19. Ho LM, Paulson EK, Brady MJ, et al. Lipid-poor adenomas on unenhanced CT: does histogram anal-Sis increase sensitivity compared with a mean attenuation threshold? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:234-238.
20. Haslam DW, James WP. Obesity. Lancet. 2005;366:1197-1209.
21. Birnbaum BA, Maki DD, Chakraborty DP, et al. Renal c-St pseudoenhancement: evaluation with an anthropomorphic body CT phantom. Radiology. 2002; 225:83-90.