1
|
Paprottka KJ, Kupfer K, Schultz V, Beer M, Zimmer C, Baum T, Kirschke JS, Sollmann N. Impact of radiation dose reduction and iterative image reconstruction on CT-guided spine biopsies. Sci Rep 2023; 13:5054. [PMID: 36977710 PMCID: PMC10050004 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-32102-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2022] [Accepted: 03/22/2023] [Indexed: 03/30/2023] Open
Abstract
This study aimed to systematically evaluate the impact of dose reduction on image quality and confidence for intervention planning and guidance regarding computed tomography (CT)-based intervertebral disc and vertebral body biopsies. We retrospectively analyzed 96 patients who underwent multi-detector CT (MDCT) acquired for the purpose of biopsies, which were either derived from scanning with standard dose (SD) or low dose (LD; using tube current reduction). The SD cases were matched to LD cases considering sex, age, level of biopsy, presence of spinal instrumentation, and body diameter. All images for planning (reconstruction: "IMR1") and periprocedural guidance (reconstruction: "iDose4") were evaluated by two readers (R1 and R2) using Likert scales. Image noise was measured using attenuation values of paraspinal muscle tissue. The dose length product (DLP) was statistically significantly lower for LD scans regarding the planning scans (SD: 13.8 ± 8.2 mGy*cm, LD: 8.1 ± 4.4 mGy*cm, p < 0.01) and the interventional guidance scans (SD: 43.0 ± 48.8 mGy*cm, LD: 18.4 ± 7.3 mGy*cm, p < 0.01). Image quality, contrast, determination of the target structure, and confidence for planning or intervention guidance were rated good to perfect for SD and LD scans, showing no statistically significant differences between SD and LD scans (p > 0.05). Image noise was similar between SD and LD scans performed for planning of the interventional procedures (SD: 14.62 ± 2.83 HU vs. LD: 15.45 ± 3.22 HU, p = 0.24). Use of a LD protocol for MDCT-guided biopsies along the spine is a practical alternative, maintaining overall image quality and confidence. Increasing availability of model-based iterative reconstruction in clinical routine may facilitate further radiation dose reductions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karolin J Paprottka
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Karina Kupfer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Vivian Schultz
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Meinrad Beer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- TUM-Neuroimaging Center, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Thomas Baum
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jan S Kirschke
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- TUM-Neuroimaging Center, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Nico Sollmann
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- TUM-Neuroimaging Center, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Computed Tomography of the Spine. Clin Neuroradiol 2022; 33:271-291. [DOI: 10.1007/s00062-022-01227-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2022] [Accepted: 10/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
AbstractThe 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.
Collapse
|
3
|
Jambi L, Alkhorayef M, Almuwanis M, Omer H, Alhasan N, Tai DT, Sulieman A, Bradley D. Assessment of the effective radiation dose and radiogenic effect in intravenous urography imaging procedures. Radiat Phys Chem Oxf Engl 1993 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110351] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
|