Photon-counting detector CT (PCD CT) is a promising technology for abdominal imaging due to its ability to provide high spatial and contrast resolution images with reduced patient radiation exposure. However, there is currently no consensus regarding the optimal imaging protocols for PCD CT. This article aims to present the PCD CT abdominal imaging protocols used by two tertiary care academic centers in the United States.
A review of PCD CT abdominal imaging protocols was conducted by two abdominal radiologists at different academic institutions. Protocols were compared in terms of acquisition parameters and reconstruction settings. Both imaging centers independently selected similar protocols for PCD CT abdominal imaging, using QuantumPlus mode.
There were some differences in the use of reconstruction kernels and iterative reconstruction levels, however the individual combination at each site resulted in similar image impressions. Overall, the imaging protocols used by both centers provide high-quality images with low radiation exposure.
These findings provide valuable insights into the development of standardized protocols for PCD CT abdominal imaging, which can help to ensure consistent as well as high-quality imaging across different institutions and allow for future multicenter research collaborations.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to study interreader agreement of the RSNA-STR-ACR (Radiological Society of North America/Society of Thoracic Radiology/American College of Radiology) consensus statement on reporting chest computed tomography (CT) findings related to COVID-19 on a sample of consecutive patients confirmed with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.
METHODS: This institutional review board-approved retrospective study included 240 cases with a mean age of 47.6 ± 15.9 years, ranging from 20 to 90 years, who had a chest CT and RT-PCR performed. Computed tomography images were independently analyzed by 2 thoracic radiologists to identify patterns defined by the RSNA-STR-ACR consensus statement, and concordance was determined with weighted κ tests. Also, CT findings and CT severity scores were tabulated and compared.
RESULTS: Of the 240 cases, 118 had findings on CT. The most frequent on the RT-PCR-positive group were areas of ground-glass opacities (80.5%), crazy-paving pattern (32.2%), and rounded pseudonodular ground-glass opacities (22.9%). Regarding the CT patterns, the most frequent in the RT-PCR-positive group was typical in 75.9%, followed by negative in 17.1%. The interreader agreement was 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.96) in this group. The CT severity score had a mean difference of -0.07 (95% confidence interval, -0.48 to 0.34) among the readers, showing no significant differences regarding visual estimation.
CONCLUSIONS: The RSNA-STR-ACR consensus statement on reporting chest CT patterns for COVID-19 presents a high interreader agreement, with the typical pattern being more frequently associated with RT-PCR-positive examinations.

To investigate possible differences between surgeons and radiologists in selecting optimal photon energy settings from a set of virtual monochromatic dual-energy computed tomography (CT) images for the assessment of bone union in patients with a suspected non-union of the appendicular skeleton.
Fifty patients suspected of having bone non-union after operative fracture treatment with a variety of fixation implants were included. Patients were scanned on a dual-source CT machine using 150/100-kVp. Monochromatic images were extracted at 70, 90, 110, 130, 150, and 190 keV. Images were reviewed by 159 orthopaedic trauma surgeons and 12 musculoskeletal radiologists in order to select the best and worst energy setting to assess bone union. Furthermore, a confidence score (1-4) was given in selecting the best and worst setting to assess bone union.
Monochromatic 190 keV images were selected most frequently as the optimal energy in titanium (34.8%), stainless steel (40%), and combined implants of stainless steel and titanium (40.5%). Confidence scores and average optimal energies were higher and average worst energies were lower for radiologists compared to surgeons in all hardware (p<0.05). Differences in optimal energy were not statistically significant for different alloys or type of fixation implant in both groups.
In both observer groups, 190 keV images were selected most frequently as the optimal energy to assess bone union in patients with a suspected non-union of the appendicular skeleton with hardware in situ. On average, musculoskeletal radiologists selected higher optimal and lower worst energy settings and were more confident in selecting both energy settings than orthopaedic trauma surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: Glenoid bone integrity is crucial for shoulder stability. The purpose of this study was to investigate a non-invasive method for quantifying bone loss regarding reliability and accuracy to detect glenoid bone deficiency in standard two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) measurements at different time points. It was hypothesized that the diameter of the circle used would significantly differ between raters, rendering this method inaccurate and not allowing for an exact estimation of glenoid defect size.
METHODS: Fifty-two shoulder CTs from 26 patients (26 2D-CTs; 26 3D-CTs) with anterior glenoid bone defects were evaluated by 6 raters at time 0 (T0) and at least 3 weeks after (T1) to assess the glenoid bone defect using the ratio method (\"best fit circle\"). Inter- and intra-rater differences concerning circle dimensions (circle diameter), measured width of bone loss and calculated percentage of bone loss (length-width-ratio) were compared in 2D- versus 3D-CT scans. The intraclass coefficient (ICC) was used to determine the inter- and intra-rater agreement.
RESULTS: The mean circle diameter difference in 2D-CT was 2.0 ± 1.9 mm versus 1.8 ± 1.5 mm in 3D-CT, respectively (p < 0.01). Mean width of bone loss in 2D-CT was 1.9 ± 1.7 mm compared to 1.7 ± 1.5 mm in 3D-CT, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean difference of bone loss percentage was 5.1 ± 4.8% in 2D-CT and 4.8 ± 4.5% in 3D-CT (p < 0.01). No significant differences concerning circle diameter, bone loss width and bone loss percentage were detected comparing T0 and T1. Circle diameter, bone loss width and bone loss percentage measurements in 3D-CT were significantly smaller compared to 2D-CT at T0 and T1 (p < 0.01). Agreement (ICC) was fair to good for all indicators of circle diameter (range 0.76-0.83), bone loss width (range 0.76-0.86) and percentage of bone loss (range 0.85-0.91). Overall, 3D-CT showed superior agreement compared to 2D-CT.
CONCLUSIONS: The ratio method varies in all glenoid parameters and is not valid for consistently quantifying glenoid bone defects even in 3D computed tomography. This must be taken into consideration when determining proper surgical treatment. The degree of glenoid bone loss alone should not be used to decide for or against a bony procedure. Rather, it is more important to define a defect size as \"critical\" and to also take other patient-specific factors into consideration so that the best treatment option can be undertaken. Application of the \"best fitting circle\" is a source of error when using the ratio method; therefore, care should be taken when measuring the circle diameter.
METHODS: III.

Bifurcation lesions represent one of the most challenging lesion subsets in interventional cardiology. The European Bifurcation Club (EBC) is an academic consortium whose goal has been to assess and recommend the appropriate strategies to manage bifurcation lesions. The quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) methods for the evaluation of bifurcation lesions have been subject to extensive research. Single-vessel QCA has been shown to be inaccurate for the assessment of bifurcation lesion dimensions. For this reason, dedicated bifurcation software has been developed and validated. These software packages apply the principles of fractal geometry to address the \"step-down\" in the bifurcation and to estimate vessel diameter accurately. This consensus update provides recommendations on the QCA analysis and reporting of bifurcation lesions based on the most recent scientific evidence from in vitro and in vivo studies and delineates future advances in the field of QCA dedicated bifurcation analysis.

BACKGROUND: Timely detection of pseudoprogression (PSP) is crucial for the management of patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) but remains difficult. Textural features of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine positron emission tomography (FET-PET) mirror tumor uptake heterogeneity; some of them may be associated with tumor progression.
METHODS: Fourteen patients with HGG and suspected of PSP underwent FET-PET imaging. A set of 19 conventional and textural FET-PET features were evaluated and subjected to unsupervised consensus clustering. The final diagnosis of true progression vs. PSP was based on follow-up MRI using RANO criteria.
RESULTS: Three robust clusters have been identified based on 10 predominantly textural FET-PET features. None of the patients with PSP fell into cluster 2, which was associated with high values for textural FET-PET markers of uptake heterogeneity. Three out of 4 patients with PSP were assigned to cluster 3 that was largely associated with low values of textural FET-PET features. By comparison, tumor-to-normal brain ratio (TNRmax) at the optimal cutoff 2.1 was less predictive of PSP (negative predictive value 57% for detecting true progression, p=0.07 vs. 75% with cluster 3, p=0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Clustering based on textural O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET features may provide valuable information in assessing the elusive phenomenon of pseudoprogression.

To standardize workflow for dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) involving common abdominopelvic exam protocols.
9 institutions (4 rsDECT, 1 dsDECT, 4 both) with 32 participants [average # years (range) in practice and DECT experience, 12.3 (1-35) and 4.6 (1-14), respectively] filled out a single survey (n = 9). A five-point agreement scale (0, 1, 2, 3, 4-contra-, not, mildly, moderately, strongly indicated, respectively) and utilization scale (0-not performing and shouldn\'t; 1-performing but not clinically useful; 2-performing but not sure if clinically useful; 3-not performing it but would like to; 4-performing and clinically useful) were used. Consensus was considered with a score of ≥2.5. Survey results were discussed over three separate live webinar sessions.
5/9 (56%) institutions exclude large patients from DECT. 2 (40%) use weight, 2 (40%) use transverse dimension, and 1 (20%) uses both. 7/9 (78%) use 50 keV for low and 70 keV for medium monochromatic reconstructed images. DECT is indicated for dual liver [agreement score (AS) 3.78; utilization score (US) 3.22] and dual pancreas in the arterial phase (AS 3.78; US 3.11), mesenteric ischemia/gastrointestinal bleeding in both the arterial and venous phases (AS 2.89; US 2.79), RCC exams in the arterial phase (AS 3.33; US 2.78), and CT urography in the nephrographic phase (AS 3.11; US 2.89). DECT for renal stone and certain single-phase exams is indicated (AS 3.00).
DECT is indicated during the arterial phase for multiphasic abdominal exams, nephrographic phase for CTU, and for certain single-phase and renal stone exams.

In response to recent technological advancements in acquisition techniques as well as a growing body of evidence regarding the optimal performance of coronary computed tomography angiography (coronary CTA), the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee has produced this update to its previously established 2009 \"Guidelines for the Performance of Coronary CTA\" (1). The purpose of this document is to provide standards meant to ensure reliable practice methods and quality outcomes based on the best available data in order to improve the diagnostic care of patients. Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines for the Interpretation is published separately (2). The Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee ensures compliance with all existing standards for the declaration of conflict of interest by all authors and reviewers for the purpose ofclarity and transparency.

Finding optimal compression levels for diagnostic imaging is not an easy task. Significant compressibility variations exist between modalities, but little is known about compressibility variations within modalities. Moreover, compressibility is affected by acquisition parameters. In this study, we evaluate the compressibility of thousands of computed tomography (CT) slices acquired with different slice thicknesses, exposures, reconstruction filters, slice collimations, and pitches. We demonstrate that exposure, slice thickness, and reconstruction filters have a significant impact on image compressibility due to an increased high frequency content and a lower acquisition signal-to-noise ratio. We also show that compression ratio is not a good fidelity measure. Therefore, guidelines based on compression ratio should ideally be replaced with other compression measures better correlated with image fidelity. Value-of-interest (VOI) transformations also affect the perception of quality. We have studied the effect of value-of-interest transformation and found significant masking of artifacts when window is widened.

The benefits of four-dimensional computed tomography (4D CT) are limited by the presence of artifacts that remain difficult to quantify. A correlation-based metric previously proposed for ciné 4D CT artifact identification was further validated as an independent artifact evaluator by using a novel qualitative assessment featuring a group of observers reaching a consensus decision on artifact location and magnitude. The consensus group evaluated ten ciné 4D CT scans for artifacts over each breathing phase of coronal lung views assuming one artifact per couch location. Each artifact was assigned a magnitude score of 1-5, 1 indicating lowest severity and 5 indicating highest severity. Consensus group results served as the ground truth for assessment of the correlation metric. The ten patients were split into two cohorts; cohort 1 generated an artifact identification threshold derived from receiver operating characteristic analysis using the Youden Index, while cohort 2 generated sensitivity and specificity values from application of the artifact threshold. The Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated between the correlation metric values and the consensus group scores for both cohorts. The average sensitivity and specificity values found with application of the artifact threshold were 0.703 and 0.476, respectively. The correlation coefficients of artifact magnitudes for cohort 1 and 2 were 0.80 and 0.61, respectively, (p < 0.001 for both); these correlation coefficients included a few scans with only two of the five possible magnitude scores. Artifact incidence was associated with breathing phase (p < 0.002), with presentation less likely near maximum exhale. Overall, the correlation metric allowed accurate and automated artifact identification. The consensus group evaluation resulted in efficient qualitative scoring, reduced interobserver variation, and provided consistent identification of artifact location and magnitudes.