Advantages and disadvantages of single-source dual-energy whole-body CT angiography with 50% reduced iodine dose at 40 keV reconstruction.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES\nTo assess the feasibility of whole-body dual-energy computed tomographic angiography (DECTA) at 40 keV with 50% reduced iodine dose protocol.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWhole-body CTA was performed in 65 patients; 31 of these patients underwent 120 kVp single-energy computed tomographic angiography (SECTA) with standard iodine dose (600\u2009mgI/kg) and 34 with 40 keV DECTA with 50% reduced iodine dose (300\u2009mgI/kg). SECTA data were reconstructed with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction of 40% (SECTA group), and DECTA data were reconstructed with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction of 40% (DECTA-40% group) and 80% (DECTA-80% group). CT numbers of the thoracic and abdominal aorta, iliac artery, background noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and arterial depiction were compared among the three groups. The CT dose index volumes (CTDIvol) for the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis were compared between SECTA and DECTA protocols.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe vascular CT numbers and background noise were found to be significantly higher in DECTA groups than in the SECTA group (p < 0.001). SNR was significantly higher in the order corresponding to DECTA-80%, SECTA, and DECTA-40% (p < 0.001). The arterial depiction was comparable in almost all arteries; however, intrapelvic arterial depiction was significantly worse in DECTA groups than in the SECTA group (p < 0.0001-0.017). Unlike the pelvic region (p = 0.055), CTDIvol for the thorax (p < 0.0001) and abdomen (p = 0.0031) were significantly higher in the DECTA protocol than in the SECTA protocol.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nDECTA at 40 keV with 50% reduced iodine dose provided higher vascular CT numbers and SNR than SECTA, and almost comparable arterial depiction, but had a degraded intrapelvic arterial depiction and required a larger radiation dose.\n\n\nADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE\nDECTA enables 50% reduction of iodine dose while maintaining image quality, arterial depiction in almost all arteries, vascular CT numbers, and SNR; however, it does not allow clear visualization of intrapelvic arteries, requiring a slightly larger radiation dose compared with SECTA with standard iodine dose.