Improved detectability of thromboses of the lower limb using low kilovoltage computed tomography

Clinical value of deep vein thrombosis density on pre-contrast and post-contrast lower-extremity CT for prediction of pulmonary thromboembolism

Background

There was a lack of studies assessing the relationship between deep vein thrombosis (DVT) Hounsfield unit (HU) density and pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE).

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical value of DVT density measured on pre- and post-contrast lower-extremity computed tomography (CT) for the prediction of PTE.

Material and Methods

From 2017 to 2021, patients who underwent pulmonary CT angiography within one week after diagnosis of DVT on lower-extremity CT were included in this retrospective study. Then, the patients without PTE were included in “DVT group” and those with both DVT and PTE were included in the “DVT-PTE group.” The DVT HU density was measured by drawing free-hand region of interests (ROIs) within the thrombus at the most proximal filling defect level. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to evaluate the predictive value of DVT density for the risk of PTE.

Results

This study included a total of 94 patients (DVT group: n=56; DVT-PTE group: m=38). DVT density was significantly higher in the DVT-PTE group than the DVT group in both pre-contrast (53.5 ± 6.2 HU vs. 44.1 ± 7.9 HU; P < 0.001) and post-contrast CT (67.0 ± 8.6 HU vs. 57.1 ± 10.6 HU; P < 0.001). ROC analysis revealed that the area under curve, sensitivity, and specificity for predicting the risk of PTE were 0.739, 71.1%, and 64.2%, respectively, at a DVT density cutoff of 48.2 HU on pre-contrast CT and were 0.779, 73.7%, and 69.6% at a DVT density cutoff of 61.8 HU on post-contrast CT.

Conclusion

The DVT density on both pre- and post-contrast CT could be a predictive factor of PTE.

Low Tube Voltage Computed Tomography Venography for Patients With Deep Vein Thrombosis of the Lower Extremities - A Comparison With Venous Ultrasonography

BACKGROUND

Low tube voltage computed tomography venography (CTV) can be expected to increase imaging contrast and decrease radiation exposure by using iterative reconstruction (IR). This study evaluated the diagnostic ability of low tube voltage CTV with IR for deep vein thrombosis (DVT), compared to ultrasonography (US).Methods and Results:Two experienced radiologists retrospectively reevaluated the CTV data of 55 of 318 consecutive patients suspected of having DVT or pulmonary embolism between December 2015 and April 2017. The 55 patients had undergone both low tube voltage CTV and US (within 1 day before or after CTV). The lower extremity veins were divided into 10 segments. The DVT forms were categorized into 3 types: complete, concentric, and eccentric. We analyzed the 534 overall segments (16 segments excluded in US) measured using both CTV and US. The sensitivity-specificity was overall 73.3-90.0%, for femoropopliteal, it was 90.0-93.2%, and for the calf, it was 71.1-87.2%. The diagnostic accuracy between the 'eccentric only' and 'others' groups focusing on DVT forms was compared, and significant differences were revealed, especially in the muscular vein.

CONCLUSIONS

The DVT diagnostic ability above the knee was comparable between low tube voltage CTV with IR and conventional CTV, and the radiation dose was reduced. It was suggested that eccentric DVT measured by CTV tend to be a false-positive, especially in the calf muscular vein.

Image Quality and Radiation Dose in CT Venography Using Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction at 80 kVp versus Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction-V at 70 kVp

Objective

To compare the objective and subjective image quality indicators and radiation doses of computed tomography (CT) venography performed using model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) at 80 kVp and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR)-V at 70 kVp.

Materials and Methods

Eighty-three patients who had undergone CT venography of the lower extremities with MBIR at 80 kVp (Group A; 21 men and 20 women; mean age, 55.5 years) or ASIR-V at 70 kVp (Group B; 18 men and 24 women; mean age, 57.3 years) were enrolled. Two radiologists retrospectively evaluated the objective (vascular enhancement, image noise, signal-to-noise ratio [SNR], contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR]) and subjective (quantum mottle, delineation of contour, venous enhancement) image quality indicators at the inferior vena cava and femoral and popliteal veins. Clinical information, radiation dose, reconstruction time, and objective and subjective image quality indicators were compared between groups A and B.

Results

Vascular enhancement, SNR, and CNR were significantly greater in Group B than in Group A (p ≤ 0.015). Image noise was significantly lower in Group B (p ≤ 0.021), and all subjective image quality indicators, except for delineation of vein contours, were significantly better in Group B (p ≤ 0.021). Mean reconstruction time was significantly shorter in Group B than in Group A (1 min 43 s vs. 131 min 1 s; p < 0.001). Clinical information and radiation dose were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusion

CT venography using ASIR-V at 70 kVp was better than MBIR at 80 kVp in terms of image quality and reconstruction time at similar radiation doses.

Time-resolved dynamic computed tomography venography (CTV) of the lower limbs - using ultra-low dosage of contrast media: a case report

Deep vein thrombosis affects approximately 1–2 per 1000 individuals each year. We present an alternative imaging option for detecting deep vein thrombosis in the lower legs using time-resolved dynamic computed tomography venography with ultra-low contrast medium dosage.