1
|
Mei K, Ehn S, Oechsner M, Kopp FK, Pfeiffer D, Fingerle AA, Pfeiffer F, Combs SE, Wilkens JJ, Rummeny EJ, Noël PB. Dual-layer spectral computed tomography: measuring relative electron density. Eur Radiol Exp 2018; 2:20. [PMID: 30175319 PMCID: PMC6103960 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-018-0051-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2018] [Accepted: 05/25/2018] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background X-ray and particle radiation therapy planning requires accurate estimation of local electron density within the patient body to calculate dose delivery to tumour regions. We evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of electron density measurement using dual-layer computed tomography (DLCT), a recently introduced dual-energy CT technique. Methods Two calibration phantoms were scanned with DLCT and virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs) at 50 keV and 200 keV were generated. We investigated two approaches to obtain relative electron densities from these VMIs: to fit an analytic interaction cross-sectional model and to empirically calibrate a conversion function with one of the phantoms. Knowledge of the emitted x-ray spectrum was not required for the presented work. Results The results from both methods were highly correlated to the nominal values (R > 0.999). Except for the water and lung inserts, the error was within 1.79% (average 1.53%) for the cross-sectional model and 1.61% (average 0.87%) for the calibrated conversion. Different radiation doses did not have a significant influence on the measurement (p = 0.348, 0.167), suggesting that the methods are reproducible. Further, we applied these methods to routine clinical data. Conclusions Our study shows a high validity of electron density estimation based on DLCT, which has potential to improve the procedure and accuracy of measuring electron density in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kai Mei
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Sebastian Ehn
- 2Department of Physics and Munich School of BioEngineering, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Felix K Kopp
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Daniela Pfeiffer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.,2Department of Physics and Munich School of BioEngineering, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Alexander A Fingerle
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Franz Pfeiffer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.,2Department of Physics and Munich School of BioEngineering, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jan J Wilkens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Ernst J Rummeny
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Peter B Noël
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.,2Department of Physics and Munich School of BioEngineering, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schwaiger BJ, Gersing AS, Hammel J, Mei K, Kopp FK, Kirschke JS, Rummeny EJ, Wörtler K, Baum T, Noël PB. Three-material decomposition with dual-layer spectral CT compared to MRI for the detection of bone marrow edema in patients with acute vertebral fractures. Skeletal Radiol 2018; 47:1533-40. [PMID: 29802531 DOI: 10.1007/s00256-018-2981-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2018] [Revised: 04/20/2018] [Accepted: 05/14/2018] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To assess whether bone marrow edema in patients with acute vertebral fractures can be accurately diagnosed based on three-material decomposition with dual-layer spectral CT (DLCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Acute (n = 41) and chronic (n = 18) osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral fractures as diagnosed by MRI (hyperintense signal in STIR sequences) in 27 subjects (72 ± 11 years; 17 women) were assessed with DLCT. Spectral data were decomposed into hydroxyapatite, edema-equivalent, and fat-equivalent density maps using an in-house-developed algorithm. Two radiologists, blinded to clinical and MR findings, assessed DLCT and conventional CT independently, using a Likert scale (1 = no edema; 2 = likely no edema; 3 = likely edema; 4 = edema). For DLCT and conventional CT, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for identifying acute fractures (Likert scale, 3 and 4) were analyzed separately using MRI as standard of reference. RESULTS For the identification of acute fractures, conventional CT showed a sensitivity of 0.73-0.76 and specificity of 0.78-0.83, whereas the sensitivity (0.93-0.95) and specificity (0.89) of decomposed DLCT images were substantially higher. Accuracy increased from 0.76 for conventional CT to 0.92-0.93 using DLCT. Interreader agreement for fracture assessment was high in conventional CT (weighted κ [95% confidence interval]; 0.81 [0.70; 0.92]) and DLCT (0.96 [0.92; 1.00]). CONCLUSIONS Material decomposition of DLCT data substantially improved accuracy for the diagnosis of acute vertebral fractures, with a high interreader agreement. This may spare patients additional examinations and facilitate the diagnosis of vertebral fractures.
Collapse
|