Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Almeida, Isabel P.
• Schyns, Lotte E. J. R.
• Öllers, Michel C.
• van Elmpt, Wouter
• Parodi, Katia
• Landry, Guillaume
• Verhaegen, Frank

Titel

Dual‐energy CT quantitative imaging: a comparison study between twin‐beam and dual‐source CT scanners

Ist Teil von

• Medical physics (Lancaster), 2017-01, Vol.44 (1), p.171-179

Ort / Verlag

United States

Erscheinungsjahr

2017

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

MEDLINE

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Purpose To assess image quality and to quantify the accuracy of relative electron densities (ρe) and effective atomic numbers (Zeff) for three dual‐energy computed tomography (DECT) scanners: a novel single‐source split‐filter (i.e., twin‐beam) and two dual‐source scanners. Methods Measurements were made with a second generation dual‐source scanner at 80/140Sn kVp, a third‐generation twin‐beam single‐source scanner at 120 kVp with gold (Au) and tin (Sn) filters, and a third‐generation dual‐source scanner at 90/150Sn kVp. Three phantoms with tissue inserts were scanned and used for calibration and validation of parameterized methods to extract ρe and Zeff, whereas iodine and calcium inserts were used to quantify Contrast‐to‐Noise‐Ratio (CNR). Spatial resolution in tomographic images was also tested. Results The third‐generation scanners have an image resolution of 6.2, ~0.5 lp/cm higher than the second generation scanner. The twin‐beam scanner has low imaging contrast for iodine materials due to its limited spectral separation. The parameterization methods resulted in calibrations with low fit residuals for the dual‐source scanners, yielding values of ρe and Zeff close to the reference values (errors within 1.2% for ρe and 6.2% for Zeff for a dose of 20 mGy, excluding lung substitute tissues). The twin‐beam scanner presented overall higher errors (within 3.2% for ρe and 28% for Zeff, also excluding lung inserts) and also larger variations for uniform inserts. Conclusions Spatial resolution is similar for the three scanners. The twin‐beam is able to derive ρe and Zeff, but with inferior accuracy compared to both dual‐source scanners.