Ultra-low-dose periradicular infiltration of the lumbar spine: spot scanning and its potential for further dose reduction by replacing helical planning CT

Next Level in Computed Tomography-Guided Periradicular Infiltration Therapy: Same Efficiency with Less Radiation Exposure

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective cohort study investigated the radiation exposure and clinical efficiency of a new institutional low-dose protocol for computed tomography (CT)-guided lumbar periradicular infiltration (PRI).

METHODS

This was a retrospective matched-pair comparison of patients undergoing single-level lumbar PRI therapy employing a new low-dose CT protocol consisting of a helical scan with reduced energy levels and tube current versus the institutional standard CT protocol. The following variables were collected: dose-length product for the planning step, interventional step, and total examination, number of CT guidance scans, examination time, and postprocedural improvement on the numerical rating scale for radicular pain.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were allocated to each group. A sufficient radiation dose reduction of 30% during PRI was achieved with the low-dose protocol with a median dose-length product of 9.8 mGy∗cm compared to 32.9 mGy∗cm with the standard protocol (P < 0.001). No need for additional multiple scans during the interventional mode was observed in the low-dose group, resulting in a comparable procedure time between the groups. Furthermore, the short-term pain-reducing effect of PRI was comparable between the low-dose and standard protocols (median delta numerical rating scale = 4 in both groups).

CONCLUSIONS

Our low-dose protocol with less tube voltage and lower electric current leads to less radiation exposure with the same safety and efficiency. In conclusion, every facility that performs CT-based procedures should check whether a further dose reduction is applicable to avoid stochastic radiation damage to the patient.

Computed Tomography of the Spine

The introduction of the first whole-body CT scanner in 1974 marked the beginning of cross-sectional spine imaging. In the last decades, the technological advancement, increasing availability and clinical success of CT led to a rapidly growing number of CT examinations, also of the spine. After initially being primarily used for trauma evaluation, new indications continued to emerge, such as assessment of vertebral fractures or degenerative spine disease, preoperative and postoperative evaluation, or CT-guided interventions at the spine; however, improvements in patient management and clinical outcomes come along with higher radiation exposure, which increases the risk for secondary malignancies. Therefore, technical developments in CT acquisition and reconstruction must always include efforts to reduce the radiation dose. But how exactly can the dose be reduced? What amount of dose reduction can be achieved without compromising the clinical value of spinal CT examinations and what can be expected from the rising stars in CT technology: artificial intelligence and photon counting CT? In this article, we try to answer these questions by systematically reviewing dose reduction techniques with respect to the major clinical indications of spinal CT. Furthermore, we take a concise look on the dose reduction potential of future developments in CT hardware and software.

Radiation dose of fluoroscopy-guided versus ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy-guided lumbar spine epidural steroid injections

OBJECTIVE

Compare radiation dose of lumbar spine epidural steroid injections (ESIs) performed under fluoroscopy guidance and ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy guidance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of consecutive lumbar ESIs performed using fluoroscopy, between May 2017 and April 2019, and using ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy, between August 2019 and February 2021, was performed. Ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy technique omits a planning CT scan, utilizes CT-fluoroscopy, and minimizes radiation dose parameters. Patient characteristics (age, sex, height, weight, body mass index (BMI)), procedural characteristics (anatomic level, type of ESI, procedure time, pain reduction, complications, trainee participation), and radiation dose were compared. Chi-square tests and two-sample t-tests were performed for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-seven patients (mean age 55.8 ± 16.7; 85 women) underwent ESIs using fluoroscopy. Sixty-six patients (mean age 60.9 ± 16.7; 33 women) underwent ESIs using ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy. The effective dose for the fluoroscopy group was 0.30 mSv ± 0.34, compared to 0.15 mSV ± 0.11 for ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy (p < 0.001). The average age in the CT-fluoroscopy group was older (p = 0.04), and there was more trainee participation in the fluoroscopy group (p < 0.001); otherwise there was no statistically significant difference in patient or procedural characteristics between the conventional fluoroscopy group and the ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy group. There was no statistically significant difference in immediate post-procedure pain reduction between the groups (p = 0.16). Four intrathecal injections occurred only in the fluoroscopy group, though this difference was not significant (p = 0.18).

CONCLUSION

Ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy technique for image-guided lumbar spine ESIs can lower radiation dose compared to fluoroscopy-guided technique.

Scout-guided needle placement-a technical approach for dose reduction in CT-guided periradicular infiltration

PURPOSE

To develop and evaluate a technical approach for CT-guided periradicular infiltration using quantitative needle access and guidance parameters extracted from CT scout images.

METHODS

Five 3D-printed phantoms of the abdomen mimicking different patients were used to develop a technical approach for scout-guided periradicular infiltration. The needle access point, puncture depth, and needle angulation were calculated using measurements extracted from anterior-posterior and lateral CT scout images. Fifty needle placements were performed with the technique thus developed. Dose exposure and number of image acquisitions were compared with ten procedures performed using a conventional free-hand technique. Data were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Parameters derived solely from scout images provided adequate guidance for successful and reliable needle placement. Needle guidance was performed with the same equipment as the standard periradicular infiltration. Two scout images and 3.5 ± 2.3 (mean ± SD) single-shot images for needle positioning were acquired. Mean DLP ± SD was 3.8 ± 2.5 mGy cm. The number of single-shot acquisitions was reduced by 68% and the overall dose was reduced by 84% in comparison with the conventional free-hand technique (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Scout-guided needle placement for periradicular infiltration is feasible and reduces radiation exposure significantly.

Periradicular infiltration of the lumbar spine: is iterative reconstruction software necessary to establish ultra-low-dose protocols? A quantitative and qualitative approach

PURPOSE

Computed tomography (CT)-guided periradicular infiltration therapy has emerged as an effective treatment option for patients with low back pain. Concern about radiation exposure requires approaches allowing significant dose reduction. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the need for iterative reconstruction software in CT-guided periradicular infiltration therapy with an ultra-low-dose protocol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred patients underwent CT-guided periradicular infiltration therapy of the lumbar spine using an ultra-low-dose protocol with adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) for image reconstruction. In addition, images were reconstructed with filtered back-projection (FBP). Four experienced raters evaluated both reconstruction types for conspicuity of anatomical and instrumental features important for ensuring safe patient treatment. Image noise was measured as a quantitative marker of image quality.

RESULTS

Interrater agreement was good for both AIDR 3D (Kendall's W = 0.83) and FBP (0.78) reconstructions. Readers assigned the same scores for all features and both reconstruction algorithms in 81.3% of cases. Image noise was significantly lower (average SD of 60.07 vs. 99.54, p < 0.05) for AIDR 3D-reconstructed images.

CONCLUSION

Although it significantly lowers image noise, iterative reconstruction software is not mandatory to achieve adequate image quality with an ultra-low-dose CT protocol for guiding periradicular infiltration therapy of the lumbar spine.