EFFECTIVE DOSE TO PATIENTS FROM THORACIC SPINE EXAMINATIONS WITH TOMOSYNTHESIS

Digital tomosynthesis based digital volume correlation: A clinically viable noninvasive method for direct measurement of intravertebral displacements using images of the human spine under physiological load

PURPOSE

We have developed a clinically viable method for measurement of direct, patient-specific intravertebral displacements using a novel digital tomosynthesis based digital volume correlation technique. These displacements may be used to calculate vertebral stiffness under loads induced by a patient's body weight; this is particularly significant because, among biomechanical variables, stiffness is the strongest correlate of bone strength. In this proof of concept study, we assessed the feasibility of the method through a preliminary evaluation of the accuracy and precision of the method, identification of a range of physiological load levels for which displacements are measurable, assessment of the relationship of measured displacements with microcomputed tomography based standards, and demonstration of the in vivo application of the technique.

METHODS

Five cadaveric T11 vertebrae were allocated to three groups in order to study (a) the optimization of digital volume correlation algorithm input parameters, (b) accuracy and precision of the method and the ability to measure displacements at a range of physiological load levels, and (c) the correlation between displacements measured using tomosynthesis based digital volume correlation vs. high resolution microcomputed tomography based digital volume correlation and large scale finite element models. Tomosynthesis images of one patient (Female, 60 yr old) were used to calculate displacement maps, and in turn stiffness, using images acquired in both standing and standing-with-weight (8 kg) configurations.

RESULTS

We found that displacements were accurate (2.28 µm total error) and measurable at physiological load levels (above 267 N) with a linear response to applied load. Calculated stiffness among three tested vertebral bodies was within an acceptable range relative to reported values for vertebral stiffness (5651-13260 N/mm). Displacements were in good qualitative and quantitative agreement with both microcomputed tomography based finite element (r²  = 0.762, P < 0.001) and digital volume correlation (r²  = 0.799, P < 0.001) solutions. For one patient tested twice, once standing and once holding weights, results demonstrated excellent qualitative reproducibility of displacement distributions with superior endplate displacements increasing by 22% with added weight.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this work collectively suggest the feasibility of the method for in vivo measurement of intravertebral displacements and stiffness in humans. These findings suggest that digital volume correlation using digital tomosynthesis imaging may be useful in understanding the mechanical response of bone to disease and may further enhance our ability to assess fracture risk and treatment efficacy for the spine.

Challenges assessing radiation risk in image-guided treatments-implications on optimisation of radiological protection

The present work explores challenges when assessing organ dose and effective dose concerning image-guided treatments. During these treatments considerable x-ray imaging is employed using technically advanced angiographic x-ray equipment. Thus, the radiation dose to organs and the related radiation risk are relatively difficult to assess. This has implications on the optimisation process, in which assessing radiation dose is one important part. In this study, endovascular aortic repair treatments were investigated. Organ dose and effective dose were assessed using Monte Carlo calculations together with a detailed specification of the exposure situation and patient size. The resulting normalised organ dose and effective dose with respect to kerma-area product for patient sizes and radiation qualities representative for the patient group were evaluated. The variability and uncertainty were investigated and their possible impact on optimisation of radiation protection was discussed. Exposure parameters, source to detector distances etc varied between treatments and also varied between image acquisitions during one treatment. Thus the derived normalised organ dose and effective dose exhibited a large range of values depending greatly on used exposure parameters and patient configuration. The derived normalised values for effective dose varied approximately between 0.05 and 0.30 mSv per Gy·cm² when taking patient sizes and exposure parameters into consideration, the values for organ doses exhibited even larger variation. The study shows a possible systematic error for derived organ doses and effective dose up to a factor of 7 if detailed exposure or patient characteristics are not known and/or not taken into consideration. The intra-treatment variability was also substantial and the normalised dose values varied up to a factor of 2 between image acquisitions during one treatment. The study shows that the use of conversion factors that are not adapted to the clinic can cause the radiation dose to be exaggerated or underestimated considerably. A conclusion from the present study is that the systematic error could be large and should be estimated together with random errors. A large uncertainty makes it difficult to detect true differences in radiation dose between methods and technology-a prerequisite for optimising radiation protection for image-guided treatments.

THORACIC SPINE IMAGING: A COMPARISON BETWEEN RADIOGRAPHY AND TOMOSYNTHESIS USING VISUAL GRADING CHARACTERISTICS

The aim of the present study was to evaluate digital tomosynthesis (DTS) in thoracic spine imaging, comparing the reproduction of anatomical structures with that achieved using digital radiography (DR). In a prospective visual grading study, 23 patients referred in 2014 for elective radiographic examination of the thoracic spine were examined using lateral DR and DTS. The DR image and the DTS section images were read in random order by four radiologists, evaluating the ability of the modalities to present a clear reproduction of nine specific relevant structures of the thoracic vertebrae 3, 6 and 9 (T3, T6 and T9). The data were analysed using visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis. The VGC analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in favour of DTS for all evaluated structures, except for the anterior vertebral edges and lower end plate surfaces of T6 and T9 and the cancellous bone of T9. The difference was most striking in T3 and for posterior structures. For no structure in any vertebra was the reproduction rated significantly better for DR. In conclusion, DTS of the thoracic spine appears to be a promising alternative to DR, especially in areas where the problem of overlaying anatomy is accentuated, such as posterior and upper thoracic structures.