Virtual unenhanced images of the abdomen with second-generation dual-source dual-energy computed tomography: Image quality and liver lesion detection

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 1-9

  De Cecco, Carlo Nicola ^a   Darnell, Anna ^b   MacÍas, Napoleón ^b   Ayuso, Juan Ramón ^b   Rodríguez, Sonia ^b   Rimola, Jordi ^b   Pagés, Mario ^b   García Criado, Ángeles ^b   Rengo, Marco ^a   Laghi, Andrea ^a   Ayuso, Carmen ^b  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

artifacts; conventional unenhanced; dual energy computed tomography; image quality; liver lesion; virtual unenhanced

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; ABDOMINAL VIRTUAL UNENHANCED; ADULT; AGED; AORTA; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONVENTIONAL UNENHANCED; DUAL ENERGY COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; KIDNEY CORTEX; KIDNEY MEDULLA; LIVER; LIVER INJURY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PANCREAS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROPERITONEAL FAT; SPLEEN;

EID: 84871623961     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31826e7902     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Godoy MCB, Naidich DP, Marchiori E, et al. Basic principles and postprocessing techniques of dual-energy CT: illustrated by selected congenital abnormalities of the thorax. J Thorac Imaging. 2009;24: 152-159.
2. Graser A, Johnson TR, Chandarana H, et al. Dual energy CT: preliminary observations and potential clinical applications in the abdomen. Eur Radiol. 2009;19: 13-23.
3. Lee SH, Lee JM, Kim KW, et al. Dual-energy computed tomography to assess tumor response to hepatic radiofrequency ablation: potential diagnostic value of virtual noncontrast images and iodine maps. Invest Radiol. 2011;46: 77-84.
4. Chandarana H, Godoy MC, Vlahos I, et al. Abdominal aorta: evaluation with dual-source dual-energy multidetector CTafter endovascular repair of aneurysmsY initial observations. Radiology. 2008;249: 692-700.
5. Stolzmann P, Frauenfelder T, Pfammatter T, et al. Endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: detection with dual-energy dual-source CT. Radiology. 2008;249: 682-691.
6. Graser A, Johnson TR, Hecht EM, et al. Dual-energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true non-enhanced images? Radiology. 2009;252: 433-440.
7. De Cecco CN, Buffa V, Fedeli S, et al. Dual energy CT (DECT) of the liver: conventional versus virtual unenhanced images. Eur Radiol. 2010;20: 2870-2875.
8. Zhang LJ, Peng J, Wu SY, et al. Liver virtual non-enhanced CT with dual-source, dual-energy CT: a preliminary study. Eur Radiol. 2010;20: 2257-2264.
9. De Cecco CN, Buffa V, Fedeli S, et al. Preliminary experience with dual energy CT (DECT) of the abdomen: real versus virtual non-enhanced images of the liver. Radiol Med. 2010;115: 1258-1266.
10. Neville AM, Gupta RT, Miller CM, et al. Detection of renal lesion enhancement with dual-energy multidetector CT. Radiology. 2011;259: 173-183.
11. Graser A, Becker CR, Staehler M, et al. Single-phase dual-energy CTallows for characterization of renal masses as benign or malignant. Invest Radiol. 2010;45: 399-405.
12. Leschka S, Stolzmann P, Baumüller S, et al. Performance of dual-energy CT with tin filter technology for the discrimination of renal cysts and enhancing mass. Acad Radiol. 2010;17: 526-534.
13. Guimarães LS, Fletcher JG, Harmsen WS, et al. Appropriate patient selection at abdominal dual-energy CT using 80 kV: relationship between patient size, image noise and image quality. Radiology. 2010;257: 732-742.
14. Barrett T, Bowden DJ, Shaida N, et al. Virtual unenhanced second generation dual source CT of the liver: is it time to discard the conventional unenhanced phase? Eur J Radiol. 2012;81: 1438-1445.
15. Heiken JP, Brink JA, McClennan BL, et al. Dynamic incremental CT: effect of volume and concentration of contrast material and patient weight on hepatic enhancement. Radiology. 1995;195: 353-357.
16. Brink JA, Heiken JP, Forman HP, et al. Hepatic spiral CT: reduction of dose of intravenous contrast material. Radiology. 1995;197: 83-88.
17. Rengo M, Bellini D, De Cecco CN, et al. The optimal contrast media policy in CT of the liver, part I: technical notes. Acta Radiol. 2011;52: 467-472.
18. Menzel H, Schibilla H, Teunen D, eds. European Guidelines on Quality Criteria for Computed Tomography. Luxembourg, Luxembourg: European Commission; 2000: 735-738.
19. Bae KT. Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: considerations and approaches. Radiology. 2010;256: 32-61.