TY - JOUR
T1 - AAPM Task Group Report 299
T2 - Quality control in multi-energy computed tomography
AU - Layman, Rick R.
AU - Leng, Shuai
AU - Boedeker, Kirsten L.
AU - Burk, Laurel M.
AU - Dang, Hao
AU - Duan, Xinhui
AU - Jacobsen, Megan C.
AU - Li, Baojun
AU - Li, Ke
AU - Little, Kevin
AU - Madhav, Priti
AU - Miller, Jessica
AU - Nute, Jessica L.
AU - Giraldo, Juan Carlos Ramirez
AU - Ruchala, Kenneth J.
AU - Tao, Shengzhen
AU - Varchena, Vladimir
AU - Vedantham, Srinivasan
AU - Zeng, Rongping
AU - Zhang, Da
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - Multi-energy computed tomography (MECT) offers the opportunity for advanced visualization, detection, and quantification of select elements (e.g., iodine) or materials (e.g., fat) beyond the capability of standard single-energy computed tomography (CT). However, the use of MECT requires careful consideration as substantially different hardware and software approaches have been used by manufacturers, including different sets of user-selected or hidden parameters that affect the performance and radiation dose of MECT. Another important consideration when designing MECT protocols is appreciation of the specific tasks being performed; for instance, differentiating between two different materials or quantifying a specific element. For a given task, it is imperative to consider both the radiation dose and task-specific image quality requirements. Development of a quality control (QC) program is essential to ensure the accuracy and reproducibility of these MECT applications. Although standard QC procedures have been well established for conventional single-energy CT, the substantial differences between single-energy CT and MECT in terms of system implementations, imaging protocols, and clinical tasks warrant QC tests specific to MECT. This task group was therefore charged with developing a systematic QC program designed to meet the needs of MECT applications. In this report, we review the various MECT approaches that are commercially available, including information about hardware implementation, MECT image types, image reconstruction, and postprocessing techniques that are unique to MECT. We address the requirements for MECT phantoms, review representative commercial MECT phantoms, and offer guidance regarding homemade MECT phantoms. We discuss the development of MECT protocols, which must be designed carefully with proper consideration of MECT technology, imaging task, and radiation dose. We then outline specific recommended QC tests in terms of general image quality, radiation dose, differentiation and quantification tasks, and diagnostic and therapeutic applications.
AB - Multi-energy computed tomography (MECT) offers the opportunity for advanced visualization, detection, and quantification of select elements (e.g., iodine) or materials (e.g., fat) beyond the capability of standard single-energy computed tomography (CT). However, the use of MECT requires careful consideration as substantially different hardware and software approaches have been used by manufacturers, including different sets of user-selected or hidden parameters that affect the performance and radiation dose of MECT. Another important consideration when designing MECT protocols is appreciation of the specific tasks being performed; for instance, differentiating between two different materials or quantifying a specific element. For a given task, it is imperative to consider both the radiation dose and task-specific image quality requirements. Development of a quality control (QC) program is essential to ensure the accuracy and reproducibility of these MECT applications. Although standard QC procedures have been well established for conventional single-energy CT, the substantial differences between single-energy CT and MECT in terms of system implementations, imaging protocols, and clinical tasks warrant QC tests specific to MECT. This task group was therefore charged with developing a systematic QC program designed to meet the needs of MECT applications. In this report, we review the various MECT approaches that are commercially available, including information about hardware implementation, MECT image types, image reconstruction, and postprocessing techniques that are unique to MECT. We address the requirements for MECT phantoms, review representative commercial MECT phantoms, and offer guidance regarding homemade MECT phantoms. We discuss the development of MECT protocols, which must be designed carefully with proper consideration of MECT technology, imaging task, and radiation dose. We then outline specific recommended QC tests in terms of general image quality, radiation dose, differentiation and quantification tasks, and diagnostic and therapeutic applications.
KW - dual-energy CT
KW - material decomposition
KW - material selective
KW - multi-energy CT
KW - quality control
KW - virtual monoenergetic
KW - virtual non-contrast
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85199988607&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85199988607&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/mp.17322
DO - 10.1002/mp.17322
M3 - Article
C2 - 39072826
AN - SCOPUS:85199988607
SN - 0094-2405
JO - Medical physics
JF - Medical physics
ER -