Evidence Hub

Myeloma bone disease imaging on a 1st-generation clinical photon-counting detector CT vs. 2nd-generation dual-source dual-energy CT

M. Winkelmann, F. Hagen, Lucie Le-Yannou, J. Weiss, P. Riffel, R. Gutjahr, S. Faby, K. Nikolaou et al.

European Radiology, 2022

28 citations

Abstract

Objective Subjective and objective image quality comparison of bone microstructure and disease-related abnormalities in multiple myeloma patients using a 1st-generation dual-source photon-counting detector CT(DS-PCD-CT) and a 2nd-generation dual-source dual-energy (energy-integrating detector) CT (DS-EID-CT). Methods Fifty multiple myeloma patients (mean age 67.7 ± 10.9 years,16 females) were prospectively enrolled. Unenhanced whole-body CTs were clinically indicated and performed on DS-EID-CT and DS-PCD-CT (median time difference: 12 months). DS-PCD-CT was performed in Quantumplus UHR mode and DS-EID-CT was performed using dual-energy mode. DS-PCD-CT kernel was set at Br64 with Quantum iterative reconstruction strength Q1; for DS-EID-CT a comparable I70f kernel with SAFIRE iterative reconstruction strength 1 was used. Two independent radiologists assessed image quality subjectively using a 5-point Likert scale considering delineation and sharpness of trabecular bone and lytic bone lesions in the spine and pelvic bones. Additionally, ImageJ was used for quantification of bony septa inside the cancellous bone and through or the edges of osteolysis. Results Overall quality as well as detectability and sharpness in the delineation of lytic bone lesions were superior for DS-PCD-CT compared with DS-EID-CT ( p < 0.0001). The inter-reader agreement for subjective image quality readings showed excellent consistency( α = 94.2–98.8). CTDI and DLP mean values for DS-PCD-CT and…

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