Comparison of Virtual Unenhanced Images Derived From Dual-Energy CT With True Unenhanced Images in Evaluation of Gallstone Disease.

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare gallstones on virtual unenhanced images and true unenhanced images acquired with dual-energy CT (DECT). MATERIALS AND METHODS We enrolled 112 patients with right upper quadrant pain and clinically suspected acute cholecystitis or gallstone who underwent DECT--including unenhanced, arterial, and portal phases. Eighty-three gallstones with composition proven by semiquantitative Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy from 45 patients who had undergone cholecystectomy (40 cholesterol gallstones from 21 patients, 43 calcium gallstones from 24 patients) were included. CT images were retrospectively evaluated for stone size, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of gallstone to bile, and visibility and density of gallstones for each image set. The visibility of each type of stone was compared with a paired t test. RESULTS Both cholesterol and calcium stones measured smaller on virtual unenhanced images than on true unenhanced images, yielding a lower sensitivity of virtual unenhanced images for detecting small gallstones. Mean CNR of cholesterol stones was 2.45 ± 1.32 versus 1.67 ± 1.55 (p < 0.032) and that of calcium stones was 10.59 ± 7.15 and 14.11 ± 9.81 (p < 0.001) for virtual unenhanced and true unenhanced images, respectively. For calcium stones, two readers found 43 of 43 (100%) on true unenhanced images; one reader found 41 of 43 (95%) and the other, 37 of 43 (86%) on virtual unenhanced images. For cholesterol stones, one reader found 20 of 40 (50%) and the other 19 of 40 (47%) on true unenhanced images versus 34 of 40 (85%) and 30 of 40 (75%), respectively, on virtual unenhanced images. The visibility of cholesterol stones was higher on virtual unenhanced images, but that of calcium stones was lower. CONCLUSION Virtual unenhanced images at DECT allow better visualization of cholesterol gallstones, but true unenhanced images allow better visualization of calcium and small gallstones.

[1]  B. Yeh,et al.  Gallstone detection at CT in vitro: effect of peak voltage setting. , 2006, Radiology.

[2]  T. Johnson,et al.  Dual-energy CT: general principles. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  R. Nelson,et al.  Dual-energy multidetector CT: how does it work, what can it tell us, and when can we use it in abdominopelvic imaging? , 2010, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[4]  Joel G Fletcher,et al.  Dual-source dual-energy CT with additional tin filtration: Dose and image quality evaluation in phantoms and in vivo. , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[5]  I. Lee,et al.  Common bile duct stones on multidetector computed tomography: attenuation patterns and detectability. , 2013, World journal of gastroenterology.

[6]  E. Balthazar,et al.  Ultrasound and CT evaluation of emergent gallbladder pathology. , 2003, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[7]  P. Colletti,et al.  Cholelithiasis: evaluation with CT. , 1987, Radiology.

[8]  J. Seo,et al.  Clinical utility of dual-energy CT in the evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules: initial experience. , 2008, Radiology.

[9]  Sang Hyun Park,et al.  Dual energy CT in patients with acute abdomen; is it possible for virtual non-enhanced images to replace true non-enhanced images? , 2013, Emergency Radiology.

[10]  D. Hough,et al.  Dual-energy and dual-source CT: is there a role in the abdomen and pelvis? , 2009, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[11]  M. Rengo,et al.  Dual energy CT (DECT) of the liver: conventional versus virtual unenhanced images , 2010, European Radiology.

[12]  T. Vogl,et al.  Compound analysis of gallstones using dual energy computed tomography--results in a phantom model. , 2010, European journal of radiology.

[13]  Hersh Chandarana,et al.  Abdominal aorta: evaluation with dual-source dual-energy multidetector CT after endovascular repair of aneurysms--initial observations. , 2008, Radiology.

[14]  P. Joseph,et al.  Noise considerations in dual energy CT scanning. , 1979, Medical physics.

[15]  M. Reiser,et al.  Material differentiation by dual energy CT: initial experience , 2007, European Radiology.

[16]  B. Choi,et al.  Initial assessment of dual-energy CT in patients with gallstones or bile duct stones: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images? , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  M. Reiser,et al.  Image quality of virtual noncontrast images derived from dual-energy CT angiography after endovascular aneurysm repair. , 2010, Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR.

[18]  K. Stierstorfer,et al.  First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system , 2006, European Radiology.

[19]  Dual-Energy CT in the Assessment of Mediastinal Lymph Nodes: Comparative Study of Virtual Non-Contrast and True Non-Contrast Images , 2013, Korean journal of radiology.

[20]  P. Cooperberg,et al.  Real-time ultrasonography. Diagnostic technique of choice in calculous gallbladder disease. , 1980, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  Borut Marincek,et al.  Endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: detection with dual-energy dual-source CT. , 2008, Radiology.

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

[23]  Christianne Leidecker,et al.  Dual-energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images? , 2009, Radiology.

[24]  K. Stierstorfer,et al.  Technical principles of dual source CT. , 2008, European journal of radiology.