Computed Tomography-Based Bone Density Assessment for Men With Prostate Cancer: Not Ready for Prime Time

CT Phantom Evaluation of 67,392 American College of Radiology Accreditation Examinations: Implications for Opportunistic Screening of Osteoporosis Using CT

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether systematic bias in attenuation measurements occurs among CT scanners made by four major manufacturers and the relevance of this bias regarding opportunistic screening for osteoporosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Data on attenuation measurement accuracy were acquired using the American College of Radiology (ACR) accreditation phantom and were evaluated in a blinded fashion for four CT manufacturers (8500 accreditation submissions for manufacturer A; 18,575 for manufacturer B; 8278 for manufacturer C; and 32,039 for manufacturer D). The attenuation value for water, acrylic (surrogate for trabecular bone), and Teflon (surrogate for cortical bone; Chemours) materials for an adult abdominal CT technique (120 kV, 240 mA, standard reconstruction algorithm) was used in the analysis. Differences in attenuation value across all manufacturers were assessed using the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by a post hoc test for pairwise comparisons. RESULTS. The mean attenuation value for water ranged from -0.3 to 2.7 HU, with highly significant differences among all manufacturers (p < 0.001). For the trabecular bone surrogate, differences in attenuation values across all manufacturers were also highly significant (p < 0.001), with mean values of 120.9 (SD, 3.5), 124.6 (3.3), 126.9 (4.4), and 123.9 (3.4) HU for manufacturers A, B, C, and D, respectively. For the cortical bone surrogate, differences in attenuation values across all manufacturers were also highly significant (p < 0.001), with mean values of 939.0 (14.2), 874.3 (13.3), 897.6 (11.3), and 912.7 (13.4) HU for manufacturers A, B, C, and D, respectively. CONCLUSION. CT scanners made by different manufacturers show systematic offsets in attenuation measurement when compared with each other. Knowledge of these off-sets is useful for optimizing the accuracy of opportunistic diagnosis of osteoporosis.