Photon Counting Computed Tomography With Dedicated Sharp Convolution Kernels: Tapping the Potential of a New Technology for Stent Imaging

Objectives The aims of this study were to assess the value of a dedicated sharp convolution kernel for photon counting detector (PCD) computed tomography (CT) for coronary stent imaging and to evaluate to which extent iterative reconstructions can compensate for potential increases in image noise. Materials and Methods For this in vitro study, a phantom simulating coronary artery stenting was prepared. Eighteen different coronary stents were expanded in plastic tubes of 3 mm diameter. Tubes were filled with diluted contrast agent, sealed, and immersed in oil calibrated to an attenuation of −100 HU simulating epicardial fat. The phantom was scanned in a modified second generation 128-slice dual-source CT scanner (SOMATOM Definition Flash, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) equipped with both a conventional energy integrating detector and PCD. Image data were acquired using the PCD part of the scanner with 48 × 0.25 mm slices, a tube voltage of 100 kVp, and tube current-time product of 100 mAs. Images were reconstructed using a conventional convolution kernel for stent imaging with filtered back-projection (B46) and with sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) at level 3 (I463). For comparison, a dedicated sharp convolution kernel with filtered back-projection (D70) and SAFIRE level 3 (Q703) and level 5 (Q705) was used. The D70 and Q70 kernels were specifically designed for coronary stent imaging with PCD CT by optimizing the image modulation transfer function and the separation of contrast edges. Two independent, blinded readers evaluated subjective image quality (Likert scale 0–3, where 3 = excellent), in-stent diameter difference, in-stent attenuation difference, mathematically defined image sharpness, and noise of each reconstruction. Interreader reliability was calculated using Goodman and Kruskal's &ggr; and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Differences in image quality were evaluated using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Differences in in-stent diameter difference, in-stent attenuation difference, image sharpness, and image noise were tested using a paired-sample t test corrected for multiple comparisons. Results Interreader and intrareader reliability were excellent (&ggr; = 0.953, ICCs = 0.891–0.999, and &ggr; = 0.996, ICCs = 0.918–0.999, respectively). Reconstructions using the dedicated sharp convolution kernel yielded significantly better results regarding image quality (B46: 0.4 ± 0.5 vs D70: 2.9 ± 0.3; P < 0.001), in-stent diameter difference (1.5 ± 0.3 vs 1.0 ± 0.3 mm; P < 0.001), and image sharpness (728 ± 246 vs 2069 ± 411 CT numbers/voxel; P < 0.001). Regarding in-stent attenuation difference, no significant difference was observed between the 2 kernels (151 ± 76 vs 158 ± 92 CT numbers; P = 0.627). Noise was significantly higher in all sharp convolution kernel images but was reduced by 41% and 59% by applying SAFIRE levels 3 and 5, respectively (B46: 16 ± 1, D70: 111 ± 3, Q703: 65 ± 2, Q705: 46 ± 2 CT numbers; P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Conclusions A dedicated sharp convolution kernel for PCD CT imaging of coronary stents yields superior qualitative and quantitative image characteristics compared with conventional reconstruction kernels. Resulting higher noise levels in sharp kernel PCD imaging can be partially compensated with iterative image reconstruction techniques.

[1]  Axel Thran,et al.  Atherosclerotic Plaque Composition : Analysis with Multicolor CT and Targeted Gold Nanoparticles 1 , 2010 .

[2]  H. Alkadhi,et al.  Computed Tomography Angiography of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts: Low Contrast Media Volume Protocols Adapted to Tube Voltage , 2016, Investigative radiology.

[3]  Stefan Ulzheimer,et al.  Feasibility of Dose-reduced Chest CT with Photon-counting Detectors: Initial Results in Humans. , 2017, Radiology.

[4]  S. Tipnis,et al.  What is the preferred strength setting of the sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction algorithm in abdominal CT imaging? , 2014, Radiological Physics and Technology.

[5]  Stefan Ulzheimer,et al.  Dual-contrast agent photon-counting computed tomography of the heart: initial experience , 2017, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[6]  Katharina Hahn,et al.  Dose-efficient ultrahigh-resolution scan mode using a photon counting detector computed tomography system , 2016, Journal of medical imaging.

[7]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  Cardiac computed tomography: indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements: report of a Writing Group deployed by the Working Group Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology. , 2008, European heart journal.

[8]  D. Maintz,et al.  Monoenergetic reconstructions for imaging of coronary artery stents using spectral detector CT: In-vitro experience and comparison to conventional images. , 2017, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[9]  Mohammadhadi Bagheri,et al.  Photon-Counting Computed Tomography for Vascular Imaging of the Head and Neck: First In Vivo Human Results , 2017, Investigative radiology.

[10]  Glenn D. Boreman,et al.  Modulation Transfer Function in Optical and Electro-Optical Systems , 2001 .

[11]  H. Alkadhi,et al.  Coronary artery stent imaging with CT using an integrated electronics detector and iterative reconstructions: first in vitro experience. , 2013, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[12]  Steffen Kappler,et al.  Low-dose lung cancer screening with photon-counting CT: a feasibility study , 2017, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  K. Jin,et al.  Heavily Calcified Coronary Arteries: Advanced Calcium Subtraction Improves Luminal Visualization and Diagnostic Confidence in Dual-Energy Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography , 2017, Investigative radiology.

[14]  H. Alkadhi,et al.  Photon-Counting CT: High-Resolution Imaging of Coronary Stents , 2017, Investigative radiology.

[15]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[16]  E. Ritman,et al.  Human Imaging With Photon Counting–Based Computed Tomography at Clinical Dose Levels: Contrast-to-Noise Ratio and Cadaver Studies , 2016, Investigative radiology.

[17]  J. Schlomka,et al.  Multienergy photon-counting K-edge imaging: potential for improved luminal depiction in vascular imaging. , 2008, Radiology.

[18]  Shuai Leng,et al.  Spectral performance of a whole-body research photon counting detector CT: quantitative accuracy in derived image sets , 2017, Physics in medicine and biology.

[19]  W Zhou,et al.  Ultra-high spatial resolution multi-energy CT using photon counting detector technology , 2017, Medical Imaging.

[20]  Thomas Flohr,et al.  Next generation coronary CT angiography: in vitro evaluation of 27 coronary stents , 2014, European Radiology.

[21]  A. Thran,et al.  Quantitative Spectral K-Edge Imaging in Preclinical Photon-Counting X-Ray Computed Tomography , 2015, Investigative radiology.

[22]  Walter Heindel,et al.  Imaging of coronary artery stents using multislice computed tomography: in vitro evaluation , 2003, European Radiology.

[23]  X Duan,et al.  Initial results from a prototype whole-body photon-counting computed tomography system , 2015, Medical Imaging.

[24]  Jung-Hee Yoon,et al.  Low-dose CT for patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis: optimal strength of sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction for image quality and diagnostic performance , 2015, Acta radiologica.

[25]  Rainer Raupach,et al.  Noise Texture Deviation: A Measure for Quantifying Artifacts in Computed Tomography Images With Iterative Reconstructions , 2017, Investigative radiology.

[26]  R Gutjahr,et al.  Dual energy CT kidney stone differentiation in photon counting computed tomography , 2017, Medical Imaging.