Photon-counting Detector CT for Liver Fat Quantification: Validation across Protocols in Metabolic Dysfunction-associated Steatotic Liver Disease.

Background Traditional energy-integrating detector CT has limited utility in accurately quantifying liver fat due to protocol-induced CT value shifts, but this limitation can be addressed by using photon-counting detector (PCD) CT, which allows for a standardized CT value. Purpose To develop and validate a universal CT to MRI fat conversion formula to enhance fat quantification accuracy across various PCD CT protocols relative to MRI proton density fat fraction (PDFF). Materials and Methods In this prospective study, the feasibility of fat quantification was evaluated in phantoms with various nominal fat fractions. Five hundred asymptomatic participants and 157 participants with suspected metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) were enrolled between September 2023 and March 2024. Participants were randomly assigned to six groups with different CT protocols regarding tube voltage (90, 120, or 140 kVp) and radiation dose (standard or low). Of the participants in the 120-kVp standard-dose asymptomatic group, 51% (53 of 104) were designated as the training cohort, with the rest of the asymptomatic group serving as the validation cohort. A CT to MRI fat quantification formula was derived from the training cohort to estimate the CT-derived fat fraction (CTFF). CTFF agreement with PDFF and its error were evaluated in the asymptomatic validation cohort and subcohorts stratified by tube voltage, radiation dose, and body mass index, and in the MASLD cohort. The factors influencing CTFF error were further evaluated. Results In the phantoms, CTFF showed excellent agreement with nominal fat fraction (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.98; mean bias, 0.2%). A total of 412 asymptomatic participants and 122 participants with MASLD were included. A CT to MRI fat conversion formula was derived as follows: MRI PDFF (%) = -0.58 · CT (HU) + 43.1. Across all comparisons, CTFF demonstrated excellent agreement with PDFF (mean bias values < 1%). CTFF error was not influenced by tube voltage, radiation dose, body mass index, or PDFF. Agreement between CTFF and PDFF was also found in the MASLD cohort (mean bias, -0.2%). Conclusion Standardized CT value from PCD CT showed a robust and remarkable agreement with MRI PDFF across various protocols and may serve as a precise alternative for liver fat quantification. © RSNA, 2024 See also the editorial by Wildman-Tobriner in this issue.