Impact of patient habitus and acquisition protocol on iodine quantification in dual source photon-counting CT

Rizza Pua; Leening P. Liu; Michael Dieckmeyer; Nadav Shapira; Pooyan Sahbaee; Grace J. Gang; Harold I. Litt; Peter B. Noël

doi:10.1101/2022.12.16.22283594

Abstract

Objective Evaluation of iodine quantification accuracy with varying iterative reconstruction level, patient habitus, and acquisition mode on a first-generation dual-source photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT) system.

Methods A multi-energy CT phantom (20 cm diameter/small) was imaged with and without an extension ring (30 by 40 cm/large). It was equipped with various iodine inserts (0.2, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0, 10.0, 15.0 mg/ml) and scanned over a range of radiation dose levels (CTDIvol 0.5, 0.8, 1.2, 1.6, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 10.0, 15.0 mGy) using four different acquisition modes: single source 120 kVp (SS120), 140 kVp (SS140) and dual-source 120 kVp (DS120), 140 kVp (DS140). Iodine density maps were produced with different levels of iterative reconstruction (QIR 0, 2, 4). To assess the agreement between nominal and measured iodine concentrations, root mean square error (RMSE) and Bland-Altman plots were generated by grouping different radiation dose levels (ultra-low: < 1.5 mGy; low: 1.5 – 5 mGy; medium: 5 – 15 mGy) and iodine concentrations (low: < 5 mg/ml; high: 5 – 15 mg/ml).

Results Overall, quantification of iodine concentrations was accurate and reliable even at ultra-low radiation dose levels. With low and high iodine concentrations, RMSE ranged from 0.25 to 0.37, 0.20 to 0.38, and 0.25 to 0.37 mg/ml for ultra-low, low, and medium radiation dose levels, respectively. Similarly, for the three acquisition modes (SS120, SS140, DS 120, DS140), RMSE was stable at 0.31, 0.28, 0.33 and 0.30 mg/ml, respectively. Considering all levels of radiation dose, acquisition mode, and iodine concentration, the accuracy of iodine quantification was higher for the phantom without extension ring (RMSE 0.21 mg/ml) and did not vary across different levels of iterative reconstruction.

Conclusions The first-generation PCCT allows for accurate iodine quantification over a wide range of iodine concentrations and radiation dose levels. Even very small concentrations of iodine can be quantified accurately at different simulated patient sizes. Stable accuracy across iterative reconstruction levels may allow further radiation exposure reductions without affecting quantitative results.

Summary Clinical photon-counting CT provides excellent iodine quantification performance for a wide range of parameters (patient habitus, acquisition parameters, and iterative reconstruction modes) due to its excellent ultra-low dose performance.

Key Results First-generation PCCTs are capable of accurately quantifying iodine over a wide range of radiation dose levels and iodine concentrations.

Further radiation exposure reductions may be possible given stable accuracy across iterative reconstruction levels.

In the future, accurate and precise iodine quantification will allow for the development of spectral-based biomarkers.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

We acknowledge support through the National Institutes of Health (R01EB030494) and Siemens Healthineers.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes