Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the minimum diagnostic radiation dose level for the detection of high-resolution (HR) lung structures, pulmonary nodules (PNs), and infectious diseases (IDs).
Materials and methods: A preclinical chest computed tomography (CT) trial was performed with a human cadaver without known lung disease with incremental radiation dose using tin filter-based spectral shaping protocols. A subset of protocols for full diagnostic evaluation of HR, PN, and ID structures was translated to clinical routine. Also, a minimum diagnostic radiation dose protocol was defined (MIN). These protocols were prospectively applied over 5 months in the clinical routine under consideration of the individual clinical indication. We compared radiation dose parameters, objective and subjective image quality (IQ).
Results: The HR protocol was performed in 38 patients (43%), PN in 21 patients (24%), ID in 20 patients (23%), and MIN in 9 patients (10%). Radiation dose differed significantly among HR, PN, and ID (5.4, 1.2, and 0.6 mGy, respectively; P < 0.001). Differences between ID and MIN (0.2 mGy) were not significant (P = 0.262). Dose-normalized contrast-to-noise ratio was comparable among all groups (P = 0.087). Overall IQ was perfect for the HR protocol (median, 5.0) and decreased for PN (4.5), ID-CT (4.3), and MIN-CT (2.5). The delineation of disease-specific findings was high in all dedicated protocols (HR, 5.0; PN, 5.0; ID, 4.5). The MIN protocol had borderline IQ for PN and ID lesions but was insufficient for HR structures. The dose reductions were 78% (PN), 89% (ID), and 97% (MIN) compared with the HR protocols.
Conclusions: Personalized chest CT tailored to the clinical indications leads to substantial dose reduction without reducing interpretability. More than 50% of patients can benefit from such individual adaptation in a clinical routine setting. Personalized radiation dose adjustments with validated diagnostic IQ are especially preferable for evaluating ID and PN lesions.
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.