Trabecular bone analysis: ultra-high-resolution CT goes far beyond high-resolution CT and gets closer to micro-CT (a study using Canon Medical CT devices).

OBJECTIVE

High-resolution CT (HR-CT) cannot image trabecular bone due to insufficient spatial resolution. Ultra-high-resolution CT may be a valuable alternative. We aimed to describe the accuracy of Canon Medical HR, super-high-resolution (SHR), and ultra-high-resolution (UHR)-CT in measuring trabecular bone microarchitectural parameters using micro-CT as a reference.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

Sixteen cadaveric distal tibial epiphyses were enrolled in this pre-clinical study. Images were acquired with HR-CT (i.e., 0.5 mm slice thickness/5122 matrix) and SHR-CT (i.e., 0.25 mm slice thickness and 10242 matrix) with and without deep learning reconstruction (DLR) and UHR-CT (i.e., 0.25 mm slice thickness/20482 matrix) without DLR. Trabecular bone parameters were compared.

RESULTS

Trabecular thickness was closest with UHR-CT but remained 1.37 times that of micro-CT (P < 0.001). With SHR-CT without and with DLR, it was 1.75 and 1.79 times that of micro-CT, respectively (P < 0.001), and 3.58 and 3.68 times that of micro-CT with HR-CT without and with DLR, respectively (P < 0.001). Trabecular separation was 0.7 times that of micro-CT with UHR-CT (P < 0.001), 0.93 and 0.94 times that of micro-CT with SHR-CT without and with DLR (P = 0.36 and 0.79, respectively), and 1.52 and 1.36 times that of micro-CT with HR-CT without and with DLR (P < 0.001). Bone volume/total volume was overestimated (i.e., 1.66 to 1.92 times that of micro-CT) by all techniques (P < 0.001). However, HR-CT values were superior to UHR-CT values (P = 0.03 and 0.01, without and with DLR, respectively).

CONCLUSION

UHR and SHR-CT were the closest techniques to micro-CT and surpassed HR-CT.