Bayesian Estimation of Cerebral Perfusion Using Reduced-Contrast-Dose Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Perfusion at 3T

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: DSC perfusion has been increasingly used in conjunction with other contrast-enhanced MR applications and therefore there is need for contrast-dose reduction when feasible. The purpose of this study was to establish the feasibility of reduced-contrast-dose brain DSC perfusion by using a probabilistic Bayesian method and to compare the results with the commonly used singular value decomposition technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Half-dose (0.05-mmol/kg) and full-dose (0.1-mmol/kg) DSC perfusion studies were prospectively performed in 20 patients (12 men; 34–70 years of age) by using a 3T MR imaging scanner and a gradient-EPI sequence (TR/TE, 1450/22 ms; flip angle, 90°). All DSC scans were processed with block circulant singular value decomposition and Bayesian probabilistic methods. SNR analysis was performed in both half-dose and full-dose groups. The CBF, CBV, and MTT maps from both full-dose and half-dose scans were evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively in both WM and GM on coregistered perfusion maps. Statistical analysis was performed by using a t test, regression, and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: The SNR was significantly (P < .0001) lower in the half-dose group with 32% and 40% reduction in GM and WM, respectively. In the half-dose group, the image-quality scores were significantly higher in Bayesian-derived CBV (P = .02) and MTT (P = .004) maps in comparison with block circulant singular value decomposition. Quantitative values of CBF, CBV, and MTT in Bayesian-processed data were comparable and without a statistically significant difference between the half-dose and full-dose groups. The block circulant singular value decomposition– derived half-dose perfusion values were significantly different from those of the full-dose group both in GM (CBF, P < .001; CBV, P = .02; MTT, P = .02) and WM (CBF, P < .001; CBV, P = .003; MTT, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced-contrast-dose (0.05-mmol/kg) DSC perfusion of the brain is feasible at 3T by using the Bayesian probabilistic method with quantitative results comparable with those of the full-dose protocol

Estimating peak skin and eye lens dose from neuroperfusion examinations: Use of Monte Carlo based simulations and comparisons to CTDI_vol, AAPM report no. 111, and ImPACT dosimetry tool values.

Purpose: CT neuroperfusion examinations are capable of delivering high radiation dose to the skin or lens of the eyes of a patient and can possibly cause deterministic radiation injury. The purpose of this study is to: (a) estimate peak skin dose and eye lens dose from CT neuroperfusion examinations based on several voxelized adult patient models of different head size and (b) investigate how well those doses can be approximated by some commonly used CT dose metrics or tools, such as CTDIvol, American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Report No. 111 style peak dose measurements, and the ImPACT organ dose calculator spreadsheet.Methods: Monte Carlo simulation methods were used to estimate peak skin and eye lens dose on voxelized patient models, including GSF&#39;s Irene, Frank, Donna, and Golem, on four scanners from the major manufacturers at the widest collimation under all available tube potentials. Doses were reported on a per 100 mAs basis. CTDIvol measurements for a 16 cm CTDI phantom, AAPM Report No. 111 style peak dose measurements, and ImPACT calculations were performed for available scanners at all tube potentials. These were then compared with results from Monte Carlo simulations.Results: The dose variations across the different voxelized patient models were small. Dependent on the tube potential and scanner and patient model, CTDIvol values overestimated peak skin dose by 26%-65%, and overestimated eye lens dose by 33%-106%, when compared to Monte Carlo simulations. AAPM Report No. 111 style measurements were much closer to peak skin estimates ranging from a 14% underestimate to a 33% overestimate, and with eye lens dose estimates ranging from a 9% underestimate to a 66% overestimate. The ImPACT spreadsheet overestimated eye lens dose by 2%-82% relative to voxelized model simulations.Conclusions: CTDIvol consistently overestimates dose to eye lens and skin. The ImPACT tool also overestimated dose to eye lenses. As such they are still useful as a conservative predictor of dose for CT neuroperfusion studies. AAPM Report No. 111 style measurements are a better predictor of both peak skin and eye lens dose than CTDIvol and ImPACT for the patient models used in this study. It should be remembered that both the AAPM Report No. 111 peak dose metric and CTDIvol dose metric are dose indices and were not intended to represent actual organ doses

Peak skin and eye lens radiation dose from brain perfusion CT based on Monte Carlo simulation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to accurately estimate the radiation dose to skin and the eye lens from clinical CT brain perfusion studies, investigate how well scanner output (expressed as volume CT dose index [CTDI(vol)]) matches these estimated doses, and investigate the efficacy of eye lens dose reduction techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Peak skin dose and eye lens dose were estimated using Monte Carlo simulation methods on a voxelized patient model and 64-MDCT scanners from four major manufacturers. A range of clinical protocols was evaluated. CTDI(vol) for each scanner was obtained from the scanner console. Dose reduction to the eye lens was evaluated for various gantry tilt angles as well as scan locations. RESULTS: Peak skin dose and eye lens dose ranged from 81 mGy to 348 mGy, depending on the scanner and protocol used. Peak skin dose and eye lens dose were observed to be 66-79% and 59-63%, respectivelAmy, of the CTDI(vol) values reported by the scanners. The eye lens dose was significantly reduced when the eye lenses were not directly irradiated. CONCLUSION: CTDI(vol) should not be interpreted as patient dose; this study has shown it to overestimate dose to the skin or eye lens. These results may be used to provide more accurate estimates of actual dose to ensure that protocols are operated safely below thresholds. Tilting the gantry or moving the scanning region further away from the eyes are effective for reducing lens dose in clinical practice. These actions should be considered when they are consistent with the clinical task and patient anatomy