Carlos Leiva-Salinas1, Lucia Flors1, Christopher R Durst1, Qinghua Hou1, James T Patrie2, Max Wintermark3, Sugoto Mukherjee4. 1. Department of Radiology, Division of Neuroradiology, University of Virginia, 1215 Lee Street-New Hospital, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA. 2. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Division of Neuroradiology, University of Virginia, 1215 Lee Street-New Hospital, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA. Sm5qd@virginia.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aims of the study were to compare the diagnostic performance of a combination of virtual non-contrast (VNC) images and arterial images obtained from a single-phase dual-energy CT (DECT) acquisition and standard non-contrast and arterial images from a biphasic protocol and to study the potential radiation dose reduction of the former approach. METHODS: All DECT examinations performed for evaluation of parathyroid adenomas during a 13-month period were retrospectively reviewed. An initial single-energy unenhanced acquisition was followed by a dual-energy arterial phase acquisition. "Virtual non-contrast images" were generated from the dual-energy acquisition. Two independent and blinded radiologists evaluated three different sets of images during three reading sessions: single arterial phase, single-phase DECT (virtual non-contrast and arterial phase), and standard biphasic protocol (true non-contrast and arterial phase). The accuracy of interpretation in lateralizing an adenoma to the side of the neck and localizing it to a quadrant in the neck was evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty patients (mean age, 65.5 years; age range, 38-87 years) were included in the study. The lateralization and localization accuracy, sensitivity, and positive predicted value (PPV) and negative predicted value (NPV) of the different image datasets were comparable. The combination of VNC and arterial images was more specific than arterial images alone to lateralize a parathyroid lesion (OR = 1.93, p = 0.043). The use of the single-phase protocol resulted in a calculated radiation exposure reduction of 52.8 %. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual non-contrast and arterial images from a single DECT acquisition showed similar diagnostic accuracy than a biphasic protocol, providing a significant dose reduction.
INTRODUCTION: The aims of the study were to compare the diagnostic performance of a combination of virtual non-contrast (VNC) images and arterial images obtained from a single-phase dual-energy CT (DECT) acquisition and standard non-contrast and arterial images from a biphasic protocol and to study the potential radiation dose reduction of the former approach. METHODS: All DECT examinations performed for evaluation of parathyroid adenomas during a 13-month period were retrospectively reviewed. An initial single-energy unenhanced acquisition was followed by a dual-energy arterial phase acquisition. "Virtual non-contrast images" were generated from the dual-energy acquisition. Two independent and blinded radiologists evaluated three different sets of images during three reading sessions: single arterial phase, single-phase DECT (virtual non-contrast and arterial phase), and standard biphasic protocol (true non-contrast and arterial phase). The accuracy of interpretation in lateralizing an adenoma to the side of the neck and localizing it to a quadrant in the neck was evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty patients (mean age, 65.5 years; age range, 38-87 years) were included in the study. The lateralization and localization accuracy, sensitivity, and positive predicted value (PPV) and negative predicted value (NPV) of the different image datasets were comparable. The combination of VNC and arterial images was more specific than arterial images alone to lateralize a parathyroid lesion (OR = 1.93, p = 0.043). The use of the single-phase protocol resulted in a calculated radiation exposure reduction of 52.8 %. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual non-contrast and arterial images from a single DECT acquisition showed similar diagnostic accuracy than a biphasic protocol, providing a significant dose reduction.
Authors: Amit Mahajan; Lee F Starker; Monica Ghita; Robert Udelsman; James A Brink; Tobias Carling Journal: World J Surg Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Thorsten R C Johnson; Bernhard Krauss; Martin Sedlmair; Michael Grasruck; Herbert Bruder; Dominik Morhard; Christian Fink; Sabine Weckbach; Miriam Lenhard; Bernhard Schmidt; Thomas Flohr; Maximilian F Reiser; Christoph R Becker Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2006-12-07 Impact factor: 5.315
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: Catherine A Madorin; Randall Owen; Brian Coakley; Hannah Lowe; Kee-Hyun Nam; Kaare Weber; Leon Kushnir; Jose Rios; Eric Genden; Puneet S Pawha; William B Inabnet Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 14.766
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: Michael Roskies; Xiaoyang Liu; Michael P Hier; Richard J Payne; Alex Mlynarek; Veronique Forest; Mark Levental; Reza Forghani Journal: J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2015-10-31
Authors: Jasmin A Holz; Hatem Alkadhi; Kai R Laukamp; Simon Lennartz; Carola Heneweer; Michael Püsken; Thorsten Persigehl; David Maintz; Nils Große Hokamp Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-12-09 Impact factor: 4.379
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