Search

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of five DE-CTA image reconstruction approaches for detection of lower extremity arterial stenosis using digital subtraction angiography as reference standard.One hundred and eleven patients (63 males; mean age, 75.0 ± 9.7 years) who underwent clinically indicated lower extremity DE-CTA were included in this IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant retrospective study. Routine multiplanar reconstructions (MPR), curved MPR (cMPR), DE-bone-and-calcified-plaque-subtraction (DE-CS), maximum-intensity projections (MIP), and DE-CS MPR were visually assessed for stenoses50%. Automatic objective stenosis grading was implemented on cMPRs. The effect of vessel calcification and luminal contrast on diagnostic performance was evaluated.Sensitivity for stenosis detection was high (96.4%-98.6%) with no significant differences among reconstruction approaches. Specificity (74.9%-92.2%) and accuracy (86.9%-94.5%) varied significantly. Pronounced vessel wall calcification and inferior intraluminal contrast attenuation had no significant effect on sensitivity (calcification: p = 0.167 for MPR; 0.567 DE-CS MPR; 0.057 DE-CS MIP; 0.272 cMPR; 0.185 automatic grading; contrast attenuation: p = 1.000 for all reconstructions), but lead to reduced specificity in visual assessment (calcification: p = 0.002 for MPR;0.001 DE-CS MPR, DE-CS MIP, and cMPR; contrast attenuation: p = 0.844 for MPR; 0.001 DE-CS MPR and DE-CS MIP; 0.420 cMPR). Routine MPR showed highest overall diagnostic performance.Regardless of image reconstruction approach, vessel calcification and intraluminal contrast attenuation, lower extremity DE-CTA possesses high sensitivity for detection of significant stenoses. Specificity and accuracy vary between reconstruction approaches, indicating the need for additional verification of potential stenotic lesions by use of MPR to reduce the number of unnecessary invasive DSAs due to false-positive CTA findings.

Objectives Trauma evaluation of extremities can be challenging in conventional radiography. A multi-use x-ray system with cone-beam CT (CBCT) option facilitates ancillary 3-D imaging without repositioning. We assessed the clinical value of CBCT scans by analyzing the influence of additional findings on therapy. Methods Ninety-two patients underwent radiography and subsequent CBCT imaging with the twin robotic scanner (76 wrist/hand/finger and 16 ankle/foot/toe trauma scans). Reports by on-call radiologists before and after CBCT were compared regarding fracture detection, joint affliction, comminuted injuries, and diagnostic confidence. An orthopedic surgeon recommended therapy based on reported findings. Surgical reports (N = 52) and clinical follow-up (N = 85) were used as reference standard. Results CBCT detected more fractures (83/64 of 85), joint involvements (69/53 of 71), and multi-fragment situations (68/50 of 70) than radiography (all p ). Six fractures suspected in radiographs were ruled out by CBCT. Treatment changes based on additional information from CBCT were recommended in 29 patients (31.5%). While agreement between advised therapy before CBCT and actual treatment was moderate (κ = 0.41 [95% confidence interval 0.35–0.47]; p ), agreement after CBCT was almost perfect (κ = 0.88 [0.83–0.93]; p ). Diagnostic confidence increased considerably for CBCT studies (p ). Median effective dose for CBCT was 4.3 μSv [3.3–5.3 μSv] compared to 0.2 μSv [0.1–0.2 μSv] for radiography. Conclusions CBCT provides advantages for the evaluation of acute small bone and joint trauma by detecting and excluding extremity fractures and fracture-related findings more reliably than radiographs. Additional findings induced therapy change in one third of patients, suggesting substantial clinical impact. Key Points • With cone-beam CT, extremity fractures and fracture-related findings can be detected and ruled out more reliably than with conventional radiography. • Additional diagnostic information provided by cone-beam CT scans has substantial impact on therapy in small bone and joint trauma. • For distal extremity injury assessment, one-stop-shop imaging without repositioning is feasible with the twin robotic x-ray system.

Modern cone-beam CT systems are capable of ultra-high-resolution 3D imaging in addition to conventional radiography and fluoroscopy. The combination of various imaging functions in a multi-use setup is particularly appealing for musculoskeletal interventions, such as CBCT arthrography (CBCTA). With this study, we aimed to investigate the feasibility of CBCTA of the wrist in a “one-stop-shop” approach with a gantry-free twin robotic scanner that does not require repositioning of subjects. Additionally, the image quality of CBCTA was compared to subsequent arthrograms on a high-end multidetector CT (MDCTA). Fourteen cadaveric wrists received CBCTA with four acquisition protocols. Specimens were then transferred to the CT suite for additional MDCTA. Dose indices ranged between 14.3 mGy (120 kVp/100 effective mAs; full-dose) and 1.0 mGy (70 kVp/41 effective mAs; ultra-low-dose) for MDCTA and between 17.4 mGy (80 kVp/2.5 mAs per pulse; full-dose) and 1.2 mGy (60 kVp/0.5 mAs per pulse; ultra-low-dose) for CBCTA. Subjective image quality assessment for bone, cartilage and ligamentous tissue was performed by seven radiologists. The interrater reliability was assessed by calculation of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) based on a two-way random effects model. Overall image quality of most CBCTA was deemed suitable for diagnostic use in contrast to a considerable amount of non-diagnostic MDCTA examinations (38.8%). The depiction of bone, cartilage and ligaments in MDCTA with any form of dose reduction was inferior to any CBCTA scan with at least 0.6 mAs per pulse (all p < 0.001). Full-dose MDCTA and low-dose CBCTA were of equal quality for bone tissue visualization (p = 0.326), whereas CBCTA allowed for better depiction of ligaments and cartilage (both p < 0.001), despite merely one third of radiation exposure (MDCTA–14.3 mGy vs. CBCTA–4.5 mGy). Moderate to good interrater reliability was ascertained for the assessment all tissues (ICC 0.689–0.756). Overall median examination time for CBCTA was 5.4 min (4.8–7.2 min). This work demonstrates that substantial dose reduction can be achieved in CT arthrography of the wrist while maintaining diagnostic image quality by employing the cone-beam CT mode of a twin robotic X-ray system. The ability of the multi-use X-ray system to switch between fluoroscopy mode and 3D imaging allows for “one-stop-shop” CBCTA in minimal examination time without the need for repositioning.

Background: Head and neck CT may be limited by dental hardware artifact. Both post-processing based iterative metal artifact reduction (iMAR) and virtual monoenergetic reconstruction (VMR) from dual-energy CT (DECT) can reduce metal artifact. Their combination is poorly described for single-source DECT systems. Objective: To compare metal artifact reduction between VMR, iMAR, and their combination, using split-filter single-source DECT in patients with severe dental hardware artifact. Methods: This retrospective study included 44 patients (9 female, 35 male; mean age 66.0±10.4 years) who underwent head and neck CT exhibiting severe dental hardware artifact. Standard images, VMR, iMAR, and VMRi-MAR were reconstructed; VMR and VMRiMAR used 40, 70, 100, 120, 150, and 190 keV. ROIs were placed to measure corrected attenuation in pronounced hyperattenuating and hypoattenuating artifacts and artifact-impaired soft tissue, as well as corrected artifact-impaired soft tissue noise. Two radiologists independently assessed soft tissue interpretability (1-5 scale); pooled ratings were analyzed. Readers selected the preferred reconstruction for each patient. Results: Mean hyperattenuating artifact corrected attenuation was 521.0 for standard, 496.4-892.2 for VMR, 48.2 for iMAR, and 32.8-91.0 for VMRiMAR. Mean hypoattenuating artifact corrected attenuation was -455.1 for standard, -408.5 to -679.9 for VMR, -37.3 for iMAR, and -17.8 to -36.9 for VMRiMAR. Mean artifact-impaired soft tissue corrected attenuation was 10.8 for standard, -0.6 to 24.9 for VMR, 4.3 for iMAR, and -2.0 to 7.8 for VMRiMAR. Mean artifact-impaired soft tissue corrected noise was 58.7 for standard, 38.2-129.7 for VMR, 11.0 for iMAR, and 5.8-45.6 for VMRiMAR. Median soft tissue interpretability was 1.2 for standard, 1.1-1.2 for VMR, 3.7 for iMAR, and 2.0-3.8 for VMRiMAR. Artifact-impaired soft tissue corrected attenuation and soft tissue interpretability were significantly improved (p