• search hit 2 of 14
Back to Result List

Obesity-related pitfalls of virtual versus true non-contrast imaging — an intraindividual comparison in 253 oncologic patients

Please always quote using this URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-313519
  • Objectives: Dual-source dual-energy CT (DECT) facilitates reconstruction of virtual non-contrast images from contrast-enhanced scans within a limited field of view. This study evaluates the replacement of true non-contrast acquisition with virtual non-contrast reconstructions and investigates the limitations of dual-source DECT in obese patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 253 oncologic patients (153 women; age 64.5 ± 16.2 years; BMI 26.6 ± 5.1 kg/m\(^2\)) received both multi-phase single-energy CT (SECT) and DECT in sequential stagingObjectives: Dual-source dual-energy CT (DECT) facilitates reconstruction of virtual non-contrast images from contrast-enhanced scans within a limited field of view. This study evaluates the replacement of true non-contrast acquisition with virtual non-contrast reconstructions and investigates the limitations of dual-source DECT in obese patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 253 oncologic patients (153 women; age 64.5 ± 16.2 years; BMI 26.6 ± 5.1 kg/m\(^2\)) received both multi-phase single-energy CT (SECT) and DECT in sequential staging examinations with a third-generation dual-source scanner. Patients were allocated to one of three BMI clusters: non-obese: <25 kg/m\(^2\) (n = 110), pre-obese: 25–29.9 kg/m\(^2\) (n = 73), and obese: >30 kg/m\(^2\) (n = 70). Radiation dose and image quality were compared for each scan. DECT examinations were evaluated regarding liver coverage within the dual-energy field of view. Results: While arterial contrast phases in DECT were associated with a higher CTDI\(_{vol}\) than in SECT (11.1 vs. 8.1 mGy; p < 0.001), replacement of true with virtual non-contrast imaging resulted in a considerably lower overall dose-length product (312.6 vs. 475.3 mGy·cm; p < 0.001). The proportion of DLP variance predictable from patient BMI was substantial in DECT (R\(^2\) = 0.738) and SECT (R\(^2\) = 0.620); however, DLP of SECT showed a stronger increase in obese patients (p < 0.001). Incomplete coverage of the liver within the dual-energy field of view was most common in the obese subgroup (17.1%) compared with non-obese (0%) and pre-obese patients (4.1%). Conclusion: DECT facilitates a 30.8% dose reduction over SECT in abdominal oncologic staging examinations. Employing dual-source scanner architecture, the risk for incomplete liver coverage increases in obese patients.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author: Henner Huflage, Andreas Steven Kunz, Robin Hendel, Johannes Kraft, Stefan Weick, Gary Razinskas, Stephanie Tina Sauer, Lenhard Pennig, Thorsten Alexander Bley, Jan-Peter Grunz
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-313519
Document Type:Journal article
Faculties:Medizinische Fakultät / Institut für diagnostische und interventionelle Radiologie (Institut für Röntgendiagnostik)
Medizinische Fakultät / Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie
Language:English
Parent Title (English):Diagnostics
ISSN:2075-4418
Year of Completion:2023
Volume:13
Issue:9
Article Number:1558
Source:Diagnostics (2023) 13:9, 1558. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13091558
DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13091558
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Tag:dual-energy CT; dual-source CT; obesity; radiation dose; spectral CT; virtual non-contrast
Release Date:2024/01/30
Date of first Publication:2023/04/26
Licence (German):License LogoCC BY: Creative-Commons-Lizenz: Namensnennung 4.0 International