Abstract
Objectives: This study investigated the radiation dose and value of prospective dualenergy computed tomography (DECT) in the diagnosis of gastric cancer.
Methods: Sixty patients scheduled for computed tomography (CT) for preoperative staging were divided into two groups. Thirty patients (Group A) underwent a single contrast-enhanced abdominal CT acquisition using a dual-source mode (100 kV/140 kV). Weighted average images of the two-kilovolt acquisitions and iodine maps were created. The remaining 30 patients underwent a standard CT scan (Group B). Two observers performed a blinded read of the images for gastric lesions, evaluating the image quality and recording effective dose.
Results: During the blinded read, observers found 90% (27/30) of the cancers in both groups. The mean imaging quality scores were 2.1±0.9 for Group A, and 2.3±1.1 for Group B. The effective mean doses were 6.59±0.59 mSv and 25.86±0.44 mSv for Groups A and B, respectively. Compared with the control group (B), the imaging quality in the low-dose group decreased a little, but the radiation dose substantially decreased by 74.6%.
Conclusion: The new DECT technique is valuable for examining gastric cancer patients. The dualkV scan mode can substantially reduce radiation dose while preserving good diagnostic image quality.
Keywords: Computed tomography (CT), radiation dose, diagnosis, gastric cancer, patients, DECT.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2373041380] [PMID: 16251394]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1576-2] [PMID: 19707768]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00247-010-1714-7] [PMID: 20535463]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7235.593] [PMID: 10698858]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/ajr.176.2.1760289] [PMID: 11159059]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/088800101300312564] [PMID: 11452401]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/ajr.176.2.1760297] [PMID: 11159060]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323031095] [PMID: 15273333]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra072149] [PMID: 18046031]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2009.440] [PMID: 20008689]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.203.2.9114097] [PMID: 9114097]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.70.833.9227222] [PMID: 9227222]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20150184] [PMID: 26781234]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr/01948454] [PMID: 18440940]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0] [PMID: 22681860]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0517-6] [PMID: 17151859]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.08.005] [PMID: 19717260]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.08.013] [PMID: 18842371]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10100047] [PMID: 20851940]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.3124] [PMID: 18430837]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0218-1] [PMID: 16609862]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-001-1255-4] [PMID: 12042970]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s003300050062] [PMID: 10663775]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s003300050674] [PMID: 10101657]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2397] [PMID: 19696291]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2522081845] [PMID: 19561253]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.314105159] [PMID: 21768237]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181f23fcd] [PMID: 20856125]