Photon-Counting Detector CT for Kidney Stone Detection in Excretory Phase CT-Comparison Between Virtual Non-contrast and Virtual Non-iodine Reconstructions in a 3D Printed Kidney Phantom.

Rationale and Objectives: To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of contrast media subtraction and kidney stone detection between a virtual non-iodine reconstruction algorithm (VNI; PureCalcium) and a virtual non-contrast (VNC) algorithm in excretory phase photon-counting detector computed tomography (PCD-CT), using a 3D printed kidney phantom under various tube voltages and radiation doses.
Materials and Methods: A 3D-printed kidney phantom, holding Calcium Oxalate (CaOx) and uric acid stones within contrast-enhanced calyces, was created. The calyx density mirrored the average density observed in 200 excretory phase patients (916 HU at 110 kV). Imaging was conducted on a clinical dual-source PCD-CT at 120 kV and 140 kV, with radiation doses set at 5, 10, and 15 mGy. VNI and VNC algorithms were applied. Two blinded readers evaluated the image quality, along with the degree of contrast media and kidney stone subtraction, using visual scales. Krippendorff's alpha was calculated to determine inter-reader agreement, and the Chi-squared test was employed for comparing ordinal data.
Results: Reader 2 rated overall image quality higher for VNI than VNC (4.90 vs. 4.00; P < .05), while Reader 1 found no significant difference (4.96 vs. 5.00; P > .05). Substantial agreement was observed between readers for contrast media subtraction in both VNC and VNI (Krippendorff's alpha range: 0.628-0.748). Incomplete contrast media subtraction occurred more frequently with VNI for both readers (Reader 1: 29% vs. 15%; P < .05; Reader 2: 24% vs. 20%; P > .05). Uric acid and smaller stones (<5 mm) were more likely to be subtracted than CaOx and larger stones in both VNC and VNI. Overall, a higher rate of stone subtraction was noted with VNI compared to VNC (Reader 1: 22% vs. 16%; Reader 2: 25% vs. 10%; P < .05). Neither radiation dose nor tube voltage significantly influenced stone subtraction (P > .05).
Conclusion: VNC demonstrated greater accuracy than VNI for contrast media subtraction and kidney stone visibility. Radiation dose and tube voltage had no significant impact. Nonetheless, both algorithms still exhibited frequent incomplete contrast media subtraction and partial kidney stone subtraction.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Andre Euler reports a relationship with SIEMENS that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Hatem Alkadhi reports a relationship with SIEMENS that includes: speaking and lecture fees. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2024 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)