Lung dual energy CT: Impact of different technological solutions on quantitative analysis

To evaluated the accuracy of spectral parameters quantification of four different CT scanners in dual energy examinations of the lung using a dedicated phantom.

Measurements were made with different technologies of the same vendor: one dual source CT scanner (DSCT), one TwinBeam (i.e. split filter) and two sequential acquisition single source scanners (SSCT). Angular separation of Calcium and Iodine signals were calculated from scatter plots of low-kVp versus high-kVp HUs. Electron density (ρe), effective atomic number (Zeff) and Iodine concentration (Iconc) were measured using Syngo.via software. Accuracy (A) of ρe, Zeff and Iconc was evaluated as the absolute percentage difference (D%) between reference values and measured ones, while precision (P) was evaluated as the variability σ obtained by repeating the measurement with different acquisition/reconstruction settings.

Angular separation was significantly larger for DSCT (α = 9.7°) and for sequential SSCT (α = 9.9°) systems. TwinBeam was less performing in material separation (α = 5.0°). The lowest average A was observed for TwinBeam (A_ρe = [4.7 ± 1.0], A_Z = [9.1 ± 3.1], A_Iconc = [19.4 ± 4.4]), while the best average A was obtained for Flash (A_ρe = [1.8 ± 0.4], A_Z = [3.5 ± 0.7], A_Iconc = [7.3 ± 1.8]). TwinBeam presented inferior average P (P_ρe = [0.6 ± 0.1], P_Z = [1.1 ± 0.2], P_Iconc = [10.9 ± 4.9]), while other technologies demonstrate a comparable average.

Different technologies performed material separation and spectral parameter quantification with different degrees of accuracy and precision. DSCT performed better while TwinBeam demonstrated not excellent performance. Iodine concentration measurements exhibited high variability due to low Iodine absolute content in lung nodules, thus limiting its clinical usefulness in pulmonary applications.