• Fabian Morsbach, Yi-Hua Zhang, Patrik Nowik, Lena Martin, Catarina Lindqvist, Anders Svensson, and Torkel B Brismar.
• Division of Radiology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: Fabian.morsbach@usz.ch.
• Nutrition. 2018 Sep 1; 53: 9-13.

ObjectivesOur purpose was to investigate whether tube potential in contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) affects body composition analysis.MethodsImages from dual-source, dual-energy CT from the abdomen with intravenous contrast media administration were used. A total of 17 patients (11 women, mean age 52) with a mean body mass index of 20.8 kg/cm2 were included. Simultaneously acquired images with a tube voltage of 80 kV and 140 kV were compared. Body composition was analyzed on a single slice at the L3 level. Parameters evaluated included muscle and fat attenuation (Hounsfield units [HU]), skeletal muscle index (cm2/m2), muscle area (cm2), and steatotic muscle area (cm2). Significant differences between 80 kV and 140 kV series were compared using the paired Student's t test.ResultsTube potential affected muscle attenuation with an average difference of 17% between 80 kV and 140 kV series (48 HU versus 41 HU, P < 0.01), fat attenuation (-84 HU versus -69 HU, P < 0.01), skeletal muscle index of 5.2% (40.1 cm2/m2 versus 42.2 cm2/m2, P < 0.01), muscle area of 5.1% (117 cm2 versus 123 cm2, P < 0.01), and steatotic muscle area of 12.9% (31 cm2 versus 35 cm2, P < 0.01).ConclusionTube potential significantly affects body segmentation in contrast-enhanced CT.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

25 keywords...

hide…