P Raghavan1, C R Durst2, D A Ornan2, S Mukherjee2, M Wintermark2, J T Patrie2, W Xin2, A L Shada3, J B Hanks3, P W Smith3. 1. From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (P.R.), University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland prashant.raghavan@gmail.com. 2. Departments of Radiology (C.R.D., D.A.O., S.M., M.W., J.T.P., W.X.). 3. Surgery (A.L.S., J.B.H., P.W.S.), University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A 4D CT protocol for detection of parathyroid lesions involves obtaining unenhanced, arterial, early, and delayed venous phase images. The aim of the study was to determine the ideal combination of phases that would minimize radiation dose without sacrificing diagnostic accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With institutional review board approval, the records of 29 patients with primary hyperparathyroidism who had undergone surgical exploration were reviewed. Four neuroradiologists who were blinded to the surgical outcome reviewed the imaging studies in 5 combinations (unenhanced and arterial phase; unenhanced, arterial, and early venous; all 4 phases; arterial alone; arterial and early venous phases) with an interval of at least 7 days between each review. The accuracy of interpretation in lateralizing an abnormality to the side of the neck (right, left, ectopic) and localizing it to a quadrant in the neck (right or left upper, right or left lower) was evaluated. RESULTS: The lateralization and localization accuracy (90.5% and 91.5%, respectively) of the arterial phase alone was comparable with the other combinations of phases. There was no statistically significant difference among the different combinations of phases in their ability to lateralize or localize adenomas to a quadrant (P = .976 and .996, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of a small group of patients shows that adequate diagnostic accuracy for parathyroid adenoma localization may be achievable by obtaining arterial phase images alone. If this outcome can be validated prospectively in a larger group of patients, then the radiation dose can potentially be reduced to one-fourth of what would otherwise be administered.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A 4D CT protocol for detection of parathyroid lesions involves obtaining unenhanced, arterial, early, and delayed venous phase images. The aim of the study was to determine the ideal combination of phases that would minimize radiation dose without sacrificing diagnostic accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With institutional review board approval, the records of 29 patients with primary hyperparathyroidism who had undergone surgical exploration were reviewed. Four neuroradiologists who were blinded to the surgical outcome reviewed the imaging studies in 5 combinations (unenhanced and arterial phase; unenhanced, arterial, and early venous; all 4 phases; arterial alone; arterial and early venous phases) with an interval of at least 7 days between each review. The accuracy of interpretation in lateralizing an abnormality to the side of the neck (right, left, ectopic) and localizing it to a quadrant in the neck (right or left upper, right or left lower) was evaluated. RESULTS: The lateralization and localization accuracy (90.5% and 91.5%, respectively) of the arterial phase alone was comparable with the other combinations of phases. There was no statistically significant difference among the different combinations of phases in their ability to lateralize or localize adenomas to a quadrant (P = .976 and .996, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of a small group of patients shows that adequate diagnostic accuracy for parathyroid adenoma localization may be achievable by obtaining arterial phase images alone. If this outcome can be validated prospectively in a larger group of patients, then the radiation dose can potentially be reduced to one-fourth of what would otherwise be administered.
Authors: Dorota D Linda; Bernard Ng; Ryan Rebello; Srinivasan Harish; George Ioannidis; J E M Young Journal: Can Assoc Radiol J Date: 2011-09-28 Impact factor: 2.248
Authors: Michael D Beland; William W Mayo-Smith; David J Grand; Jason T Machan; Jack M Monchik Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Steven E Rodgers; George J Hunter; Leena M Hamberg; Dawid Schellingerhout; David B Doherty; Gregory D Ayers; Suzanne E Shapiro; Beth S Edeiken; Mylene T Truong; Douglas B Evans; Jeffrey E Lee; Nancy D Perrier Journal: Surgery Date: 2006-10-02 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Haggi Mazeh; Guennadi Kouniavsky; David F Schneider; Konstantinos I Makris; Rebecca S Sippel; Alan P B Dackiw; Herbert Chen; Martha A Zeiger Journal: Surgery Date: 2012-10-13 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: George J Hunter; Dawid Schellingerhout; Thinh H Vu; Nancy D Perrier; Leena M Hamberg Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-07-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Adriana G Ramirez; Amber L Shada; Allison N Martin; Prashant Raghavan; Christopher R Durst; Sugoto Mukherjee; John R Gaughen; David A Ornan; John B Hanks; Philip W Smith Journal: Surgery Date: 2016-06-11 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Carlos Leiva-Salinas; Lucia Flors; Christopher R Durst; Qinghua Hou; James T Patrie; Max Wintermark; Sugoto Mukherjee Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2016-09-02 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: B Griffith; H Chaudhary; G Mahmood; A M Carlin; E Peterson; M Singer; S C Patel Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-09-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Steven Raeymaeckers; Yannick De Brucker; Tim Vanderhasselt; Nico Buls; Johan De Mey Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 1.930
Authors: Michael A Morris; Babak Saboury; Mark Ahlman; Ashkan A Malayeri; Elizabeth C Jones; Clara C Chen; Corina Millo Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 5.555