Evidence Hub

Intraindividual comparison of photon-counting detector CT and third-generation dual-source energy-integrating detector CT in multiphasic contrast-enhanced abdominal CT

Sofue K, Nishiuchi K, Ishikawa K, Ueno Y, Negi N, Umeno A, Kozuki R, Yamaguchi T et al.

Scientific reports, 2026

88 participants

Abstract

This study aimed to compare image quality between photon-counting detector computed tomography (PCD-CT) and third-generation dual-source energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) in multiphasic contrast-enhanced abdominal imaging using intraindividual analysis. This retrospective study included 88 patients who underwent both arterial phase (AP) and portal venous phase (PVP) abdominal CT with PCD-CT and EID-CT. Virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs) from 50 to 90 keV were reconstructed in PCD-CT, and 120 kVp images were applied in EID-CT. Quantitative image analysis evaluated CT attenuation, image noise, and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in abdominal organs and vessels. Qualitative image quality, including vessel and parenchymal contrast, noise, and overall image quality, was assessed by two radiologists using a 5-point Likert scale. Compared with EID-CT, VMIs at 50–70 keV obtained from PCD-CT demonstrated significantly higher CT attenuation values (P < 0.001) across all evaluated abdominal organs and vessels. CNRs at 70 keV were significantly greater than those in EID-CT for all objects (P < 0.001), with increases of 13.3‒41.6% on AP and 40.4‒49.3% on PVP. Image noise in 70 keV VMI was lower than EID-CT (P < 0.001). Optimal image quality was achieved using VMIs at 60–70 keV, which achieved significantly higher qualitative scores (P < 0.001) than those from EID-CT. Substantial interobserver agreement was observed (κ = 0.60–0.79). The CT dose volume index was slightly lower with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 88 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free