Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CT arthrography: in vitro evaluation of single and dual energy for optimization of technique

  • Technical Report
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to optimize CT arthrography technique and determine if dual energy CT (DECT) can provide any benefit over single energy CT (SECT). Iodinated contrast attenuation at different concentrations was measured using DECT and SECT at different beam energies (140, 120, and 80 kVp). Dose and noise were measured on phantoms at different tube currents. Three bovine femoral condyles with artificially created cartilage defects were scanned with dose-equivalent protocols. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between cartilage and iodine was measured, and the appearance of cartilage defects was graded by two readers. DECT scans were post-processed for iodine quantification. The beam energy 80 kVp had the highest iodine signal, 50% greater than DECT, 75% greater than 120 kVp, and 100% greater than 140 kVp. Noise was nearly identical for all techniques when dose was matched. The 80 kVp level had the highest CNR, 25% higher than 120 kVp and DECT, and 33% greater than 140 kVp. The 80 kVp technique was also preferred by both readers. DECT iodine quantification was significantly limited by the post-processing application, noise, and beam hardening. In this in-vitro study, the SECT 80 kVp CT arthrography technique was superior to currently performed 120 and 140 kVP SECT techniques and DECT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  1. Schmidt B, Brendenhoeller C, Flohr T. Dual source CT imaging. In: Hofmann L, Seidensticker P, editors. Dual source CT technology. Heidelberg: Springer Medizin Verlag; 2008. p. 19–33.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Johnson TR, Krauss B, Sedlmair M, Grasruck M, Bruder H, Morhard D, et al. Material differentiation by dual energy CT: initial experience. Eur Radiol. 2007;17(6):1510–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Morhard D, Fink C, Graser A, Reiser MF, Becker C, Johnson TR. Cervical and cranial computed tomographic angiography with automated bone removal: dual energy computed tomography versus standard computed tomography. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(5):293–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sommer WH, Johnson TR, Becker CR, Arnoldi E, Kramer H, Reiser MF, et al. The value of dual-energy bone removal in maximum intensity projections of lower extremity computed tomography angiography. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(5):285–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Graser A, Johnson TR, Bader M, Staehler M, Haseke N, Nikolaou K, et al. Dual energy CT characterization of urinary calculi: initial in vitro and clinical experience. Invest Radiol. 2008;43(2):112–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Graser A, Johnson TR, Hecht EM, Becker CR, Leidecker C, Staehler M, et al. Dual-energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images? Radiology. 2009;252(2):433–40

  7. Choi HK, Al-Arfaj A, Eftekhari A, Munk PL, Shojania K, Reid G, et al. Dual energy computed tomography in tophaceous gout. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;68:1609–12.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sun C, Miao F, Wang XM, Wang T, Ma R, Wang DP, et al. An initial qualitative study of dual-energy CT in the knee ligaments. Surg Radiol Anat. 2008;30(5):443–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. Radiographics. 2002;22(6):1541–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Reiser M, Karpf PM, Bernett P. Diagnosis of chondromalacia patellae using CT arthrography. Eur J Radiol. 1982;2(3):181–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Reiser M, Rupp N, Karpf PM, Feuerbach S, Paar O. Experience with CT-arthrography of the cruciate ligaments of the knee. Report on 512 examinations. Rofo. 1982;137(4):372–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Berquist TH. Imaging of articular pathology: MRI, CT, arthrography. Clin Anat. 1997;10(1):1–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. De Filippo M, Bertellini A, Pogliacomi F, Sverzellati N, Corradi D, Garlaschi G, et al. Multidetector computed tomography arthrography of the knee: diagnostic accuracy and indications. Eur J Radiol. 2008;70(2):342–51.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lecouvet FE, Simoni P, Koutaissoff S, Vande Berg BC, Malghem J, Dubuc JE. Multidetector spiral CT arthrography of the shoulder. Clinical applications and limits, with MR arthrography and arthroscopic correlations. Eur J Radiol. 2008;68(1):120–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Obermann WR. Optimizing joint-imaging: (CT)-arthrography. Eur Radiol. 1996;6(3):275–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Vande Berg BC, Lecouvet FE, Poilvache P, Maldague B, Malghem J. Spiral CT arthrography of the knee: technique and value in the assessment of internal derangement of the knee. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(7):1800–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Xiong CZ, Hao JM. Spiral CT arthrography of multiplanar reconstruction and virtual arthroscopy technique in diagnosis of knee with internal derangements. Chin J Traumatol. 2004;7(2):108–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hall FM, Rosenthal DI, Goldberg RP, Wyshak G. Morbidity from shoulder arthrography: etiology, incidence, and prevention. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981;136(1):59–62.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Yu L, Primak AN, Liu X, McCollough CH. Image quality optimization and evaluation of linearly mixed images in dual-source, dual-energy CT. Med Phys. 2009;36(3):1019–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave., A21, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    Naveen Subhas, Maxime Freire, Andrew N. Primak, Joshua M. Polster, Michael P. Recht, William J. Davros & Carl S. Winalski

Authors
  1. Naveen Subhas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maxime Freire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrew N. Primak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joshua M. Polster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael P. Recht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. William J. Davros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Carl S. Winalski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naveen Subhas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Subhas, N., Freire, M., Primak, A.N. et al. CT arthrography: in vitro evaluation of single and dual energy for optimization of technique. Skeletal Radiol 39, 1025–1031 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-010-0932-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-010-0932-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation