Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of virtual monoenergetic and polyenergetic images reconstructed from dual-layer detector CT angiography of the head and neck

  • Computed Tomography
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the image quality of virtual monoenergetic images and polyenergetic images reconstructed from dual-layer detector CT angiography (DLCTA).

Methods

Thirty patients who underwent DLCTA of the head and neck were retrospectively identified and polyenergetic as well as virtual monoenergetic images (40 to 120 keV) were reconstructed. Signals (± SD) of the cervical and cerebral vessels as well as lateral pterygoid muscle and the air surrounding the head were measured to calculate the CNR and SNR. In addition, subjective image quality was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Student's t-test and Wilcoxon test were used to determine statistical significance.

Results

Compared to polyenergetic images, although noise increased with lower keV, CNR (p < 0.02) and SNR (p > 0.05) of the cervical, petrous and intracranial vessels were improved in virtual monoenergetic images at 40 keV and virtual monoenergetic images at 45 keV were also rated superior regarding vascular contrast, assessment of arteries close to the skull base and small arterial branches (p < 0.0001 each).

Conclusions

Compared to polyenergetic images, virtual monoenergetic images reconstructed from DLCTA at low keV ranging from 40 to 45 keV improve the objective and subjective image quality of extra- and intracranial vessels and facilitate assessment of vessels close to the skull base and of small arterial branches.

Key points

• Virtual monoenergetic images greatly improve attenuation, while noise only slightly increases.

• Virtual monoenergetic images show superior contrast-to-noise ratios compared to polyenergetic images.

• Virtual monoenergetic images significantly improve image quality at low keV.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

DECT:

dual-energy CT

CNR:

contrast-to-noise ratio

SNR:

signal-to-noise ratio

keV:

kiloelectron volt

References

  1. Smith WS, Roberts HC, Chuang NA et al (2003) Safety and feasibility of a CT protocol for acute stroke: combined CT, CT angiography, and CT perfusion imaging in 53 consecutive patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 24(4):688–690

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Coutts SB, Lev MH, Eliasziw M et al (2004) ASPECTS on CTA source images versus unenhanced CT: added value in predicting final infarct extent and clinical outcome. Stroke 35(11):2472–2476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lev MH, Farkas J, Rodriguez VR, Schwamm LH et al (2001) CT angiography in the rapid triage of patients with hyperacute stroke to intraarterial thrombolysis: accuracy in the detection of large vessel thrombus. J Comput Assist Tomogr 25(4):520–528

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Danad I, Fayad ZA, Willemink MJ, Min JK (2015) New Applications of cardiac computed tomography: dual-energy, spectral, and molecular CT imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 8(6):710–723

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Pomerantz SR, Kamalian S, Zhang D et al (2013) Virtual monochromatic reconstruction of dual-energy unenhanced head CT at 65-75 keV maximizes image quality compared with conventional polychromatic CT. Radiology 266(1):318–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Neuhaus V, Abdullayev N, Große Hokamp N, et al. Improvement of image quality in unenhanced dual-layer CT of the head using virtual monoenergetic images compared with polyenergetic single-energy CT. Invest Radiol. 2017

  7. Schneider D, Apfaltrer P, Sudarski S et al (2014) Optimization of kiloelectron volt settings in cerebral and cervical dual-energy CT angiography determined with virtual monoenergetic imaging. Acad Radiol 21(4):431–436

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sudarski S, Apfaltrer P, Nance JW Jr et al (2013) Optimization of keV-settings in abdominal and lower extremity dual-source dual-energy CT angiography determined with virtual monoenergetic imaging. Eur J Radiol 82(10):e574–e581

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eller A, Wuest W, Kramer M et al (2014) Carotid CTA: Radiation exposure and image quality with the use of attenuation-based, automated kilovolt selection. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 35(2):237–241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. May MS, Kramer MR, Eller A et al (2014 Sep) Automated tube voltage adaptation in head and neck computed tomography between 120 and 100 kV: effects on image quality and radiation dose. Neuroradiology 56(9):797–803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lell MM, Jost G, Korporaal JG et al (2015) Optimizing contrast media injection protocols in state-of-the art computed tomographic angiography. Invest Radiol 50(3):161–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mannil M, Ramachandran J, Vittoria de Martini I, et al. Modified dual-energy algorithm for calcified plaque removal: evaluation in carotid computed tomography angiography and comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Invest Radiol. 2017.

  13. Uotani K, Watanabe Y, Higashi M et al (2009) Dual-energy CT head bone and hard plaque removal for quantification of calcified carotid stenosis: utility and comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Eur Radiol 19(8):2060–2065

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Watanabe Y, Uotani K, Nakazawa T et al (2009) Dual-energy direct bone removal CT angiography for evaluation of intracranial aneurysm or stenosis: comparison with conventional digital subtraction angiography. Eur Radiol 19(4):1019–1024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Morhard D, Fink C, Graser A et al (2009) Cervical and cranial computed tomographic angiography with automated bone removal: dual energy computed tomography versus standard computed tomography. Invest Radiol 44(5):293–297

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Alvarez RE, Macovski A (1976) Energy-selective reconstructions in X-ray computerized tomography. Phys Med Biol 21(5):733–744

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Marin D, Boll DT, Mileto A et al (2014) State of the art: dual-energy CT of the abdomen. Radiology 271(2):327–342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, Fletcher JG (2015) Dual- and multi-energy ct: principles, technical approaches, and clinical applications. Radiology 276(3):637–653

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Yu L, Leng S, McCollough CH (2012) Dual-energy CT-based monochromatic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199(5 Suppl):S9–S15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Riffel P, Haubenreisser H, Meyer M et al (2016) Carotid dual-energy CT angiography: Evaluation of low keV calculated monoenergetic datasets by means of a frequency-split approach for noise reduction at low keV levels. Eur J Radiol 85(4):720–725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Maass C, Baer M, Kachelriess M (2009) Image-based dual energy CT using optimized precorrection functions: a practical new approach of material decomposition in image domain. Med Phys 36(8):3818–3829

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lehmann LA, Alvarez RE, Macovski A et al (1981) Generalized image combinations in dual KVP digital radiography. Med Phys 8(5):659–667

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dong X, Niu T, Zhu L (2014) Combined iterative reconstruction and image-domain decomposition for dual energy CT using total-variation regularization. Med Phys 41(5):051909

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhao X, Hu JJ, Zhao YS et al (2014) Iterative dual energy material decomposition from spatial mismatched raw data sets. J Xray Sci Technol 22(6):745–762

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kalender WA, Klotz E, Kostaridou L (1988) An algorithm for noise suppression in dual energy CT material density images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 7(3):218–224

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Albrecht MH, Trommer J, Wichmann JL et al (2016) Comprehensive comparison of virtual monoenergetic and linearly blended reconstruction techniques in third-generation dual-source dual-energy computed tomography angiography of the thorax and abdomen. Invest Radiol 51(9):582–590

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Albrecht MH, Scholtz JE, Hüsers K et al (2016) Advanced image-based virtual monoenergetic dual-energy CT angiography of the abdomen: optimization of kiloelectron volt settings to improve image contrast. Eur Radiol 26(6):1863–1870

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Schabel C, Bongers M, Sedlmair M et al (2014) Assessment of the hepatic veins in poor contrast conditions using dual energy CT: evaluation of a novel monoenergetic extrapolation software algorithm. Rofo 186(6):591–597

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Scholtz JE, Kaup M, Kraft J, Nöske EM (2015) et la. Objective and subjective image quality of primary and recurrent squamous cell carcinoma on head and neck low-tube-voltage 80-kVp computed tomography. Neuroradiology 57(6):645–651

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany

    Victor Neuhaus, Nils Große Hokamp, Nuran Abdullayev, Volker Maus, Christoph Kabbasch, Anastasios Mpotsaris, David Maintz & Jan Borggrefe

Authors
  1. Victor Neuhaus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nils Große Hokamp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nuran Abdullayev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Volker Maus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christoph Kabbasch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Anastasios Mpotsaris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. David Maintz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jan Borggrefe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Victor Neuhaus.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Victor Neuhaus.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• retrospective

• cross-sectional study

• performed at one institution

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Neuhaus, V., Große Hokamp, N., Abdullayev, N. et al. Comparison of virtual monoenergetic and polyenergetic images reconstructed from dual-layer detector CT angiography of the head and neck. Eur Radiol 28, 1102–1110 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5081-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5081-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation