In vivo comparison of radiation exposure of dual-energy CT versus low-dose CT versus standard CT for imaging urinary calculi.

PURPOSE Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) is an emerging imaging modality with the unique capability of determining urinary stone composition. This study compares radiation exposure of DECT, standard single-energy CT (SECT), and low-dose renal stone protocol single-energy CT (LDSECT) for the evaluation of nephrolithiasis in a single in vivo patient cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS Following institutional review board (IRB) approval, we retrospectively reviewed 200 consecutive DECT examinations performed on patients with suspected urolithiasis over a 6-month period. Of these, 35 patients had undergone examination with our LDSECT protocol, and 30 patients had undergone examination of the abdomen and pelvis with our SECT imaging protocol within 2 years of the DECT examination. The CT dose index volume (CTDIvol) was used to compare radiation exposure between scans. Image quality was objectively evaluated by comparing image noise. Statistical evaluation was performed using a Student's t-test. RESULTS DECT performed at 80/140 kVp and 100/140 kVp did not produce a significant difference in radiation exposure compared with LDSECT (p=0.09 and 0.18, respectively). DECT performed at 80/140 kVp and 100/140 kVp produced an average 40% and 31%, respectively, reduction in radiation exposure compared with SECT (p<0.001). For patients imaged with the 100/140 kVp protocol, average values for images noise were higher in the LDSECT images compared with DECT images (p<0.001) and there was no significant difference in image noise between DECT and SECT images in the same patient (p=0.88). Patients imaged with the 80/140 kVp protocol had equivocal image noise compared with LDSECT images (p=0.44), however, DECT images had greater noise compared with SECT images in the same patient (p<0.001). Of the 75 patients included in the study, stone material was available for 16; DECT analysis correctly predicted stone composition in 15/16 patients (93%). CONCLUSION DECT provides knowledge of stone composition in addition to the anatomic information provided by LDSECT/SECT without increasing patient radiation exposure and with minimal impact on image noise.

[1]  Daniel T Boll,et al.  Renal stone assessment with dual-energy multidetector CT and advanced postprocessing techniques: improved characterization of renal stone composition--pilot study. , 2009, Radiology.

[2]  Thomas Henzler,et al.  Dual-energy CT: radiation dose aspects. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  Paras Shah,et al.  Using Hounsfield unit measurement and urine parameters to predict uric acid stones. , 2013, Urology.

[4]  James C. Williams,et al.  Noninvasive differentiation of uric acid versus non-uric acid kidney stones using dual-energy CT. , 2007, Academic radiology.

[5]  C. Claussen,et al.  Dual-energy CT for the characterization of urinary calculi: In vitro and in vivo evaluation of a low-dose scanning protocol , 2009, European Radiology.

[6]  R C Smith,et al.  The value of unenhanced helical computerized tomography in the management of acute flank pain. , 1998, The Journal of urology.

[7]  J. Boone,et al.  CT dose index and patient dose: they are not the same thing. , 2011, Radiology.

[8]  W D Foley,et al.  Ureteral calculi: diagnostic efficacy of helical CT and implications for treatment of patients. , 1999, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[9]  Hatem Alkadhi,et al.  In vivo identification of uric acid stones with dual-energy CT: diagnostic performance evaluation in patients , 2010, Abdominal Imaging.

[10]  J. Teichman Acute Renal Colic from Ureteral Calculus , 2004 .

[11]  Elliot Fishman,et al.  Dual source computed tomography: a novel technique to determine stone composition. , 2008, Urology.

[12]  Shuai Leng,et al.  Dual-energy dual-source CT with additional spectral filtration can improve the differentiation of non-uric acid renal stones: an ex vivo phantom study. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  J. Cernigliaro,et al.  Determination of ureter stent appearance on dual-energy computed tomography scan. , 2012, Urology.

[14]  Cynthia H McCollough,et al.  Image quality optimization and evaluation of linearly mixed images in dual-source, dual-energy CT. , 2009, Medical physics.

[15]  Heinz-Peter Schlemmer,et al.  Urinary calculi composed of uric acid, cystine, and mineral salts: differentiation with dual-energy CT at a radiation dose comparable to that of intravenous pyelography. , 2010, Radiology.

[16]  F. Sardanelli,et al.  In vivo evaluation of the chemical composition of urinary stones using dual-energy CT. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  K E Applegate,et al.  Impact in the emergency department of unenhanced CT on diagnostic confidence and therapeutic efficacy in patients with suspected renal colic: a prospective survey. 2000 ARRS President's Award. American Roentgen Ray Society. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  Borut Marincek,et al.  Dual-energy computed tomography for the differentiation of uric acid stones: ex vivo performance evaluation , 2008, Urological Research.

[19]  Natalie N. Braun,et al.  Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. , 2009, Radiologic clinics of North America.