Accuracy of ultra-high resolution and virtual non-calcium reconstruction algorithm for stenosis evaluation with photon-counting CT: results from a dynamic phantom study.

Pál Maurovich-Horvat, Akos Varga-Szemes, U Joseph Schoepf, Tilman Emrich, Daniel Pinos, Nicola Fink, Emese Zsarnoczay, Milán Vecsey-Nagy, Jim O'Doherty, Thomas Allmendinger, Junia Hagenauer, Joseph P Griffith Iii

Journal: European radiology experimental 2024;8(1):102

PMID: 39207565

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We compared ultra-high resolution (UHR), standard resolution (SR), and virtual non-calcium (VNCa) reconstruction for coronary artery stenosis evaluation using photon-counting computed tomography (PC-CT).

METHODS

One vessel phantom (4-mm diameter) containing solid calcified lesions with 25% and 50% stenoses inside a thorax phantom with motion simulation underwent PC-CT using UHR (0.2-mm slice thickness) and SR (0.6-mm slice thickness) at heart rates of 60 beats per minute (bpm), 80 bpm, and 100 bpm. A paired t-test or Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni correction was used.

RESULTS

For 50% stenosis, differences in percent mean diameter stenosis between UHR and SR at 60 bpm (51.0 vs 60.3), 80 bpm (51.7 vs 59.6), and 100 bpm (53.7 vs 59.0) (p ≤ 0.011), as well as between VNCa and SR at 60 bpm (50.6 vs 60.3), 80 bpm (51.5 vs 59.6), and 100 bpm (53.7 vs 59.0) were significant (p ≤ 0.011), while differences between UHR and VNCa at all heart rates (p ≥ 0.327) were not significant. For 25% stenosis, differences between UHR and SR at 60 bpm (28.0 vs 33.7), 80 bpm (28.4 vs 34.3), and VNCa vs SR at 60 bpm (29.1 vs 33.7) were significant (p ≤ 0.015), while differences for UHR vs SR at 100 bpm (29.9 vs 34.0), as well as for VNCa vs SR at 80 bpm (30.7 vs 34.3) and 100 bpm (33.1 vs 34.0) were not significant (p ≥ 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Stenosis quantification accuracy with PC-CT improved using either UHR acquisition or VNCa reconstruction.

RELEVANCE STATEMENT

PC-CT offers to scan with UHR mode and the reconstruction of VNCa images both of them could provide improved coronary stenosis quantification at increased heart rates, allowing a more accurate stenosis grading at low and high heart rates compared to SR.

KEY POINTS

Evaluation of coronary stenosis with conventional CT is challenging at high heart rates. PC-CT allows for scanning with ECG-gated UHR and SR modes. UHR and VNCa images were compared in a dynamic phantom. UHR improves stenosis quantification up to 100 bpm. VNCa reconstruction improves stenosis evaluation up to 80 bpm.

© 2024. The Author(s).

Address: Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.; MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Medical Imaging Centre, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.; Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.; Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.; Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.; Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.; Siemens Medical Solutions USA Inc, Malvern, PA, USA.; Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Forchheim, Germany.; Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Forchheim, Germany.; Faculty of Medicine, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.; Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.; Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.; MTA-SE Cardiovascular Imaging Research Group, Medical Imaging Centre, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.; Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. [email protected].; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany. [email protected].; German Centre for Cardiovascular Research, Partner site Rhine-Main, Mainz, Germany. [email protected].
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.