Background: The aim of this study was to quantitatively benchmark iodine imaging across specific virtual monoenergetic energy levels, iodine maps and virtual non-contrast images with different phantom sizes and iodine concentrations, using a rapid switching dual-energy CT (DECT) and a dual source DECT, in order to investigate accuracy and potential differences between the technologies.
Methods: Solutions of iodine contrast (10, 20, 30, 50, and 100 mg/mL), sterile water and saline were scanned in a phantom on a rapid switching single-source and dual-source DECT scanners from two different vendors. The phantom was equipped with polyurethane rings simulating three body sizes. The datasets were reconstructed in virtual monoenergetic energy levels (70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130, and 140 keV), virtual non-contrast images and iodine maps. HU and iodine concentrations were measured by placing ROIs in the iodine solutions.
Results: The iodine concentrations were reproduced with a high degree of accuracy for the single-source DECT (1.8-9.0%), showing a slight dependence on phantom size. The dual source DECT technique showed deviant values (error -33.8 to 12.0%) for high concentrations. In relation to the virtual non-contrast measurements, the images from both vendors were affected by the iodine concentration and phantom size (-127.8 to 539.1 HU). Phantom size did not affect the calculated monoenergetic attenuation values, but the attenuation values varied between the scanners.
Conclusions: Quantitative measurements of post-processed images are dependent on the concentration of iodine, the phantom size and different technologies. However, our study indicates that the iodine maps are reliable for quantification of iodine.
Keywords: Contrast media; Iodine; Phantoms (imaging); Tomography (x-ray; computed).