Emerging technologies in CT- radiation dose reduction and dual-energy CT

Seminars in Roentgenology

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 192-202

  Kulkarni, Naveen M ^a   Pinho, Daniella F ^a   Kambadakone, Avinash R ^a   Sahani, Dushyant V ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; IODINE;

ABDOMINAL DISEASE; ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; AUTOMATED TUBE CURRENT MODULATION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; COLLIMATOR; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DOSE LENGTH PRODUCT; DOSE RESPONSE; DUAL ENERGY COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; FOLLOW UP; GANTRY ROTATION; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; MEDICAL TERMINOLOGY; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NOISE REDUCTION; PATIENT CARE; PELVIC DISEASE; PITCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DETECTOR; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION HAZARD; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TUBE CURRENT; TUBE POTENTIAL; VELOCITY; VOLUME COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY DOSE INDEX; WEIGHTED COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY DOSE INDEX;

HUMANS; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHY, ABDOMINAL; TOMOGRAPHY SCANNERS, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84879454195     PISSN: 0037198X     EISSN: 15584658     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1053/j.ro.2013.03.007     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States rN-B, MD. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, Report no 160-(2009) Bethesda, MD.
2. Smith-Bindman R., Lipson J., Marcus R., et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med 2009, 169(22):2078-2086.
3. Berrington de Gonzalez A., Mahesh M., Kim K.P., et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009, 169(22):2071-2077.
4. Brenner D.J., Hall E.J. Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007, 357(22):2277-2284.
5. AAMP. American Association of Physicists in Medicine The measurement, reporting and management of radiation dose in CT Report 96 Report of AAPM task group 23 of the diagnostic imaging council CT Committee American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 2008.
6. McNitt-Gray M.F. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: Topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. Radiographics 2002, 22(6):1541-1553.
7. McCollough C.H., Leng S., Yu L., et al. CT dose index and patient dose: They are not the same thing. Radiology 2011, 259(2):311-316.
8. Khorasani R. Can radiology professional society guidelines be converted to effective decision support?. J Am Coll Radiol 2010, 7(8):561-562.
9. Poletti P.A., Platon A., Rutschmann O.T., et al. Low-dose versus standard-dose CT protocol in patients with clinically suspected renal colic. Am J Roentgenol 2007, 188(4):927-933.
10. Israel G.M., Cicchiello L., Brink J., et al. Patient size and radiation exposure in thoracic, pelvic, and abdominal CT examinations performed with automatic exposure control. Am J Roentgenol 2010, 195(6):1342-1346.
11. Sahani D.V., Kalva S.P., Hahn P.F., et al. 16-MDCT angiography in living kidney donors at various tube potentials: Impact on image quality and radiation dose. Am J Roentgenol 2007, 188(1):115-120.
12. Kalra M.K., Prasad S., Saini S., et al. Clinical comparison of standard-dose and 50% reduced-dose abdominal CT: Effect on image quality. Am J Roentgenol 2002, 179(5):1101-1106.
13. McCollough C.H., Bruesewitz M.R., Kofler J.M. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: Overview of available options. Radiographics 2006, 26(2):503-512.
14. Mahesh M. Advances in CT technology and application to pediatric imaging. Pediatr Radiol 2011, 41(suppl 2):493-497.
15. Sodickson A. Strategies for reducing radiation exposure in multi-detector row CT. Radiol Clin North Am 2012, 50(1):1-14.
16. Rizzo S., Kalra M., Schmidt B., et al. Comparison of angular and combined automatic tube current modulation techniques with constant tube current CT of the abdomen and pelvis. Am J Roentgenol 2006, 186(3):673-679.
17. Kalra M.K., Maher M.M., Toth T.L., et al. Comparison of Z-axis automatic tube current modulation technique with fixed tube current CT scanning of abdomen and pelvis. Radiology 2004, 232(2):347-353.
18. Yeh B.M., Shepherd J.A., Wang Z.J., et al. Dual-energy and low-kVp CT in the abdomen. Am J Roentgenol 2009, 193(1):47-54.
19. Kopp A.F., Heuschmid M., Claussen C.D. Multidetector helical CT of the liver for tumor detection and characterization. Eur Radiol 2002, 12(4):745-752.
20. Iezzi R., Santoro M., Marano R., et al. Low-dose multidetector CT angiography in the evaluation of infrarenal aorta and peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Radiology 2012, 263(1):287-298.
21. Schindera S.T., Graca P., Patak M.A., et al. Thoracoabdominal-aortoiliac multidetector-row CT angiography at 80 and 100kVp: Assessment of image quality and radiation dose. Invest Radiol 2009, 44(10):650-655.
22. Eller A., May M.S., Scharf M., et al. Attenuation-based automatic kilovolt selection in abdominal computed tomography: Effects on radiation exposure and image quality. Invest Radiol 2012, 47(10):559-565.
23. Gnannt R., Winklehner A., Eberli D., et al. Automated tube potential selection for standard chest and abdominal CT in follow-up patients with testicular cancer: Comparison with fixed tube potential. Eur Radiol 2012, 22(9):1937-1945.
24. Petersilka M., Bruder H., Krauss B., et al. Technical principles of dual source CT. Eur J Radiol 2008, 68(3):362-368.
25. Kalra M.K., Maher M.M., Blake M.A., et al. Detection and characterization of lesions on low-radiation-dose abdominal CT images postprocessed with noise reduction filters. Radiology 2004, 232(3):791-797.
26. Silva A.C., Lawder H.J., Hara A., et al. Innovations in CT dose reduction strategy: Application of the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm. Am J Roentgenol 2010, 194(1):191-199.
27. Hara A.K., Paden R.G., Silva A.C., et al. Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: Feasibility study. Am J Roentgenol 2009, 193(3):764-771.
28. Han B.K., Grant K.L., Garberich R., et al. Assessment of an iterative reconstruction algorithm (SAFIRE) on image quality in pediatric cardiac CT datasets. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2012, 6(3):200-204.
29. Desai G.S., Uppot R.N., Yu E.W., et al. Impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality and radiation dose in multidetector CT of large body size adults. Eur Radiol 2012, 22(8):1631-1640.
30. Kambadakone A.R., Chaudhary N.A., Desai G.S., et al. Low-dose MDCT and CT enterography of patients with Crohn disease: Feasibility of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. Am J Roentgenol 2011, 196(6):W743-W752.
31. Prakash P., Kalra M.K., Kambadakone A.K., et al. Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol 2010, 45(4):202-210.
32. Kulkarni N.M., Uppot R.N., Eisner B.H., et al. Radiation dose reduction at multidetector CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for evaluation of urolithiasis: How low can we go?. Radiology 2012, 265(1):158-166.
33. Itoh S., Koyama S., Ikeda M., et al. Further reduction of radiation dose in helical CT for lung cancer screening using small tube current and a newly designed filter. J Thorac Imaging 2001, 16(2):81-88.
34. Hidajat N., Schroder R.J., Vogl T., et al. The efficacy of lead shielding in patient dosage reduction in computed tomography. Rofo 1996, 165(5):462-465.
35. Grobe H., Sommer M., Koch A., et al. Dose reduction in computed tomography: The effect of eye and testicle shielding on radiation dose measured in patients with beryllium oxide-based optically stimulated luminescence dosimetry. Eur Radiol 2009, 19(5):1156-1160.
36. Dauer L.T., Casciotta K.A., Erdi Y.E., et al. Radiation dose reduction at a price: The effectiveness of a male gonadal shield during helical CT scans. BMC Med Imaging 2007, 7:5.
37. Kalra M.K., Dang P., Singh S., et al. In-plane shielding for CT: Effect of off-centering, automatic exposure control and shield-to-surface distance. Korean J Radiol 2009, 10(2):156-163.
38. Johnson TRC, Krauss B, Sedlmair M, et al: Material differentiation by dual energy CT: Initial experience. Eur Radiol 17(6):1510-1517, 2007.
39. Alvarez R.E., Macovski A. Energy-selective reconstructions in X-ray computerized tomography. Phys Med Biol 1976, 21(5):733-744.
40. Flohr TG, Bruder H, Petersilka M, et al: First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 16(2):256-268 2006.
41. 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: A review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc 30(4):1037-1055, 2010.
42. Kaza R.K., Platt J.F., Cohan R.H., et al: Dual-Energy CT with single- and dual-source scanners: Current applications in evaluating the genitourinary tract. Radiographics: 32(2):353-369, 2012.
43. Graser A., Johnson T.R.C., Hecht E.M., et al. Dual-energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: Can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images?. Radiology 2009, 252(2):433-440.
44. Brown CL, Hartman RP, Dzyubak OP, et al: Dual-energy CT iodine overlay technique for characterization of renal masses as cyst or solid: A phantom feasibility study. Eur Radiol 19(5):1289-1295, 2009.
45. Apfaltrer P., Meyer 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(1):65-70.
46. Song K.D., Kim C.K., Park B.K., et al. Utility of iodine overlay technique and virtual unenhanced images for the characterization of renal masses by dual-energy CT. Am J Roentgenol 2011, 197(6):W1076-W1082.
47. Lee S.H., Lee J.M., Kim K.W., 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(2):77-84.
48. Silva AC, Morse BG, Paden RG, et al: Dual-energy (spectral) CT: Applications in abdominal imaging. Radiographics 31(4):1031-1046, 2011.
49. Matsumoto K, Jinzaki M, Tanami Y, et al: Virtual monochromatic spectral imaging with fast kilovoltage switching: Improved image quality as compared with that obtained with conventional 120-kVp CT. Radiology 259(1):257-262, 2011.
50. Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y, et al: Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: Preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology 237(3):945-951; 2005.
51. Kalva S.P., Sahani D.V., Hahn P.F., et al. Using the K-edge to improve contrast conspicuity and to lower radiation dose with a 16-MDCT: A phantom and human study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006, 30(3):391-397.
52. Marin D, Nelson RC, Samei E, et al: Hypervascular liver tumors: Low tube voltage, high tube current multidetector CT during late hepatic arterial phase for detection-Initial clinical experience. Radiology 251(3):771-9; 2009.
53. Schindera S.T., Nelson R.C., Mukundan S., et al. Hypervascular liver tumors: Low tube voltage, high tube current multi-detector row CT for enhanced detection-Phantom study. Radiology 2008, 246(1):125-132.
54. Pinho D.F., Kulkarni N.M., Krishnaraj A., et al. Initial experience with single-source dual-energy CT abdominal angiography and comparison with single-energy CT angiography: Image quality, enhancement, diagnosis and radiation dose. Eur Radiol 2013, 23(2):351-359.
55. Robinson E., Chandarana H., Macari M. Dual source dual energy MDCT: Comparison of 80kVp and weighted average 120kVp data for conspicuity of hypo-vascular liver metastases. Invest Radiol 2010, 45(7):413-418.
56. Chandarana H., Megibow A.J., Cohen B.A., et al. Iodine quantification with dual-energy CT: Phantom study and preliminary experience with renal masses. Am J Roentgenol 2011, 196(6):W693-W700.
57. Graser A., Becker C.R., Staehler M., et al. Single-phase dual-energy CT allows for characterization of renal masses as benign or malignant. Invest Radiol 2010, 45(7):399-405.
58. Kaza R.K., Caoili E.M., Cohan R.H., et al. Distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal lesions with fast kilovoltage-switching dual-energy CT. Am J Roentgenol 2011, 197(6):1375-1381.
59. 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 masses. Acad Radiol 2010, 17(4):526-534.
60. Neville A.M., Gupta R.T., Miller C.M., et al. Detection of renal lesion enhancement with dual-energy multidetector CT. Radiology 2011, 259(1):173-183.
61. Cairns P. Renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Biomark 2010, 9(1-6):461-473.
62. Thomas C., Heuschmid M., Schilling D., et al. Urinary calculi composed of uric acid, cystine, and mineral salts: Differentiation with dual-energy CT at a radiation dose comparable to that of intravenous pyelography. Radiology 2010, 257(2):402-409.
63. Hong X., Choi H., Loyer E.M., et al. Gastrointestinal stromal tumor: Role of CT in diagnosis and in response evaluation and surveillance after treatment with imatinib. Radiographics 2006, 26(2):481-495.
64. Kawamoto S., Permpongkosol S., Bluemke D.A., et al. Sequential changes after radiofrequency ablation and cryoablation of renal neoplasms: Role of CT and MR imaging. Radiographics 2007, 27(2):343-355.
65. Park M.H., Rhim H., Kim Y.S., et al. Spectrum of CT findings after radiofrequency ablation of hepatic tumors. Radiographics 2008, 28(2):379-390. [discussion 390-372].
66. Tuma R.S. Sometimes size doesn't matter: Reevaluating RECIST and tumor response rate endpoints. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006, 98(18):1272-1274.
67. Wang R., Yu W., Wu R., et al. Improved image quality in dual-energy abdominal CT: Comparison of iterative reconstruction in image space and filtered back projection reconstruction. Am J Roentgenol 2012, 199(2):402-406.
68. Barrett T., Bowden D.J., 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(7):1438-1445.