Evaluation of raw-data-based and calculated electron density for contrast media with a dual-energy CT technique

The aim of the current study is to evaluate the accuracy and the precision of raw-data-based relative electron density (RED_raw) and the calibration-based RED (RED_cal) at a range of low-RED to high-RED for tissue-equivalent phantom materials by comparing them with reference RED (RED_ref) and to present the difference of RED_raw and RED_cal for the contrast medium using dual-energy CT (DECT).

The RED_raw images were reconstructed by raw-data-based decomposition using DECT. For evaluation of the accuracy of the RED_raw, RED_ref was calculated for the tissue-equivalent phantom materials based on their specified density and elemental composition. The RED_cal images were calculated using three models: Lung-Bone model, Lung-Ti model and Lung-Ti (SEMAR) model which used single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR). The difference between RED_raw and RED_cal was calculated.

In the titanium rod core, the deviations of RED_raw and RED_cal (Lung-Bone model, Lung-Ti model and Lung-Ti model with SEMAR) from RED_ref were 0.45%, 50.8%, 15.4% and 15.0%, respectively. The largest differences between RED_raw and RED_cal (Lung-Bone model, Lung-Ti model and Lung-Ti model with SEMAR) in the contrast medium phantom were 8.2%, -23.7%, and 28.7%, respectively. However, the differences between RED_raw and RED_cal values were within 10% at 20 mg/ml. The standard deviation of the RED_raw was significantly smaller than the RED_cal with three models in the titanium and the materials that had low CT numbers.

The RED_cal values could be affected by beam hardening artifacts and the RED_cal was less accurate than RED_raw for high-Z materials as titanium.

The raw-data-based reconstruction method could reduce the beam hardening artifact compared with image-based reconstruction and increase the accuracy for the RED estimation in high-Z materials, such as titanium and iodinated contrast medium.