Lung Cancer Screening Using Clinical Photon-Counting Detector Computed Tomography and Energy-Integrating-Detector Computed Tomography: A Prospective Patient Study

To evaluate the diagnostic quality of photon-counting detector (PCD) computed tomography (CT) in patients undergoing lung cancer screening compared with conventional energy-integrating detector (EID) CT in a prospective multireader study.Patients undergoing lung cancer screening with conventional EID-CT were prospectively enrolled and scanned on a PCD-CT system using similar automatic exposure control settings and reconstruction kernels. Three thoracic radiologists blinded to CT system compared PCD-CT and EID-CT images and scored examinations using a 5-point Likert comparison score (-2 [left image is worse] to +2 [left image is better]) for artifacts, sharpness, image noise, diagnostic image quality, emphysema visualization, and lung nodule evaluation focusing on the border. Post hoc correction of Likert scores was performed such that they reflected PCD-CT performance in comparison to EID-CT. A nonreader radiologist measured objective image noise.Thirty-three patients (mean, 66.9 ± 5.6 years; 11 female; body mass index; 30.1 ± 5.1 kg/m 2 ) were enrolled. Mean volume CT dose index for PCD-CT was lower (0.61 ± 0.21 vs 0.73 ± 0.22; P < 0.001). Pooled reader results showed significant differences between imaging modalities for all comparative rankings ( P < 0.001), with PCD-CT favored for sharpness, image noise, image quality, and emphysema visualization and lung nodule border, but not artifacts. Photon-counting detector CT had significantly lower image noise (74.4 ± 10.5 HU vs 80.1 ± 8.6 HU; P = 0.048).Photon-counting detector CT with similar acquisition and reconstruction settings demonstrated improved image quality and less noise despite lower radiation dose, with improved ability to depict pulmonary emphysema and lung nodule borders compared with EID-CT at low-dose lung cancer CT screening.