Ultra-low-dose sequential computed tomography for quantitative lung aeration assessment—a translational study

Abstract

BackgroundQuantitative lung computed tomography (CT) provides fundamental information about lung aeration in critically ill patients. We tested a scanning protocol combining reduced number of CT slices and tube current, comparing quantitative analysis and radiation exposure to conventional CT.MethodsIn pigs, CT scans were performed during breath hold in a model of lung injury with three different protocols: standard spiral with 180 mAs tube current-time product (Spiral180), sequential with 20-mm distance between slices and either 180 mAs (Sequential180) or 50 mAs (Sequential50). Spiral scans of critically ill patients were collected retrospectively, and subsets of equally spaced slices were extracted. The agreement between CT protocols was assessed with Bland–Altman analysis.ResultsIn 12 pigs, there was good concordance between the sequential protocols and the spiral scan (all biases ≤1.9%, agreements ≤±6.5%). In Spiral180, Sequential180 and Sequential50, estimated dose exposure was 2.3 (2.1–2.8), 0.21 (0.19–0.26), and 0.09 (0.07–0.10) mSv, respectively (p < 0.001 compared to Spiral180); number of acquired slices was 244 (227–252), 12 (11–13) and 12 (11–13); acquisition time was 7 (6–7), 23 (21–25) and 24 (22–26) s. In 32 critically ill patients, quantitative analysis extrapolated from 1-mm slices interleaved by 20 mm had a good concordance with the analysis performed on the entire spiral scan (all biases <1%, agreements ≤2.2%).ConclusionsIn animal CT data, combining sequential scan and low tube current did not affect significantly the quantitative analysis, with a radiation exposure reduction of 97%, reaching a dose comparable to chest X-ray, but with longer acquisition time. In human CT data, lung aeration analysis could be extrapolated from a subset of thin equally spaced slices.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi: 10.1186/s40635-017-0133-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Validation of MRI for Volumetric Quantification of Atelectasis in the Perioperative Period: An Experimental Study in Swine

“…This study was a pilot validation study and no preliminary data were available. Therefore, we based our sample size on a similar studies design (Acosta et al, 2014; Ball et al, 2017a). We aimed at measuring at least 30 pairs of CT/MR volume measurements and planned to increase the total number of measurements to 40 to replace technical failures.…”

Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Quantitative Assessment of Lung Aeration: A Pilot Translational Study

“…Second, we could not compare patient scans with a reference imaging technique, such as CT, as it would have been ethically unacceptable. In the future, validation studies should consider using low-dose CT acquisition protocols ( Chiumello et al, 2014 ; Ball et al, 2017a , b ) to validate quantitative MRI. Third, in patient scans the effect of the chest wall could have been different between patients, however, the study excluded obese subjects yielding a rather homogeneous chest wall thickness.…”

Congenital lung abnormality quantification by computed tomography: The CLAQ method

“…This is still considered a reliable sample of the lung, however, as we scored 20 CT-slices opposed to 10 slices in previously validated CTquantification studies on diffuse lung diseases. 15,38,39 The use of a hierarchical scoring system may have caused parameters which are lower in the hierarchy to be underreported. However, individual scoring of all abnormalities would be a time-intensive task that may be expedited by using machine learning methods in the future.…”