Multiphase photon counting detector CT data sets - Which combination of contrast phase and virtual non-contrast algorithm is best suited to replace true non-contrast series in the assessment of active bleeding?

PURPOSE

Aim of this study was to determine which virtual non-contrast (VNC) reconstruction algorithm, applied to which contrast phase of computed tomography angiography, best matches true non-contrast (TNC) images in the assessment of active bleeding.

METHOD

Patients who underwent a triphasic scan (pre-contrast, arterial, portal venous contrast) on a photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT) (120 kV, image quality level 68) with suspected active (tumor, postoperative, spontaneous or other) bleeding were retrospectively included in this study. Conventional (VNC) and a calcium-preserving VNC algorithm (VNC) were derived from both arterial (art) and portal venous (pv) contrast scans, and analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively by two independent and blinded raters.

RESULTS

40 patients (22 female, mean age 76 years) were included. Measurements of CT values showed significant albeit small differences between TNC and VNC for most analyzed tissue regions without clear superiority of a VNC algorithm or contrast phase (e.g. ΔHU fat TNC to VNC 3.1 HU). However, qualitative analysis showed a preference to VNC in terms of image quality (on a 5-point Likert scale VNC = 3.5 ± 0.8, VNC = 3.7 ± 0.7, VNC = 3.7 ± 0.7, VNC = 3.8 ± 0.7) and residual calcium contrast (VNC = 3.0 ± 0.8, VNC = 3.5 ± 0.7, VNC = 3.6 ± 0.7, VNC = 3.9 ± 0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

When multiple post-contrast phases are available, VNC series based on portal venous phase are the most suitable replacement for an additional pre-contrast scan, with the prospect of a significant reduction in patient radiation dose.