PURPOSE: To determine the true distribution of radiopaque beads (ROBs) after hepatic embolization in swine as imaged by micro-computed tomography (microCT) compared with in vivo cone-beam computerized tomography (CT) imaged at different kVp settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Swine (n = 3) underwent hepatic transarterial embolization (n = 6) with the use of 70-150-μm ROBs under fluoroscopic guidance. After stasis, in vivo cone-beam CT was performed at 120, 100, and 80 kVp. The animal was euthanized, the liver resected, and microCT with 17 μm resolution performed on embolized tissue samples. The resulting cone-beam CT and microCT data were segmented and registered. Total vessel length, minimum volume-enclosing ellipsoid (MVEE), and number of independent volumes were measured. Maximum-intensity projections (MIPs) were generated for each cone-beam CT. RESULTS: Metrics for all cone-beam CT segmentations differed significantly from microCT segmentations. Segmentations at 80 kVp presented significantly greater vessel length, MVEE, and number of independent volumes compared with 100 kVp and 120 kVp. In addition, 100 kVp segmentations presented significantly greater vessel length than 120 kVp. MIPs presented greater visualization than cone-beam CT segmentations and improved as kVp decreased. CONCLUSIONS: The full ROB distribution was more extensive than was apparent on cone-beam CT. Quantitative measures of embolic distribution demonstrated significantly better correlation with microCT with decreasing kVp. Similarly, qualitative analysis of MIPs showed improved visualization of beads with decreasing kVp. These findings demonstrate the clinical value of 80 kVp and 100 kVp protocols in the imaging of radiopaque embolizations compared with 120 kVp. However, considerations on X-ray penetration and dose may favor use of 100 kVp imaging over 80 kVp. Published by Elsevier Inc.
PURPOSE: To determine the true distribution of radiopaque beads (ROBs) after hepatic embolization in swine as imaged by micro-computed tomography (microCT) compared with in vivo cone-beam computerized tomography (CT) imaged at different kVp settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Swine (n = 3) underwent hepatic transarterial embolization (n = 6) with the use of 70-150-μm ROBs under fluoroscopic guidance. After stasis, in vivo cone-beam CT was performed at 120, 100, and 80 kVp. The animal was euthanized, the liver resected, and microCT with 17 μm resolution performed on embolized tissue samples. The resulting cone-beam CT and microCT data were segmented and registered. Total vessel length, minimum volume-enclosing ellipsoid (MVEE), and number of independent volumes were measured. Maximum-intensity projections (MIPs) were generated for each cone-beam CT. RESULTS: Metrics for all cone-beam CT segmentations differed significantly from microCT segmentations. Segmentations at 80 kVp presented significantly greater vessel length, MVEE, and number of independent volumes compared with 100 kVp and 120 kVp. In addition, 100 kVp segmentations presented significantly greater vessel length than 120 kVp. MIPs presented greater visualization than cone-beam CT segmentations and improved as kVp decreased. CONCLUSIONS: The full ROB distribution was more extensive than was apparent on cone-beam CT. Quantitative measures of embolic distribution demonstrated significantly better correlation with microCT with decreasing kVp. Similarly, qualitative analysis of MIPs showed improved visualization of beads with decreasing kVp. These findings demonstrate the clinical value of 80 kVp and 100 kVp protocols in the imaging of radiopaque embolizations compared with 120 kVp. However, considerations on X-ray penetration and dose may favor use of 100 kVp imaging over 80 kVp. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: M Thomsen; M Poulsen; M Bech; A Velroyen; J Herzen; F Beckmann; R Feidenhans'l; F Pfeiffer Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2012-10-12 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Karun V Sharma; Zainab Bascal; Hugh Kilpatrick; Koorosh Ashrafi; Sean L Willis; Matthew R Dreher; Andrew L Lewis Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2016-07-05 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Ayele H Negussie; Matthew R Dreher; Carmen Gacchina Johnson; Yiqing Tang; Andrew L Lewis; Gert Storm; Karun V Sharma; Bradford J Wood Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2015-06-24 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Vania Tacher; Rafael Duran; MingDe Lin; Jae Ho Sohn; Karun V Sharma; Zhijun Wang; Julius Chapiro; Carmen Gacchina Johnson; Nikhil Bhagat; Matthew R Dreher; Dirk Schäfer; David L Woods; Andrew L Lewis; Yiqing Tang; Michael Grass; Bradford J Wood; Jean-François Geschwind Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Rafael Duran; Karun Sharma; Matthew R Dreher; Koorosh Ashrafi; Sahar Mirpour; MingDe Lin; Ruediger E Schernthaner; Todd R Schlachter; Vania Tacher; Andrew L Lewis; Sean Willis; Mark den Hartog; Alessandro Radaelli; Ayele H Negussie; Bradford J Wood; Jean-François H Geschwind Journal: Theranostics Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 11.556
Authors: Andrew L Lewis; Sean L Willis; Matthew R Dreher; Yiqing Tang; Koorosh Ashrafi; Bradford J Wood; Elliot B Levy; Karun V Sharma; Ayele H Negussie; Andrew S Mikhail Journal: Future Oncol Date: 2018-06-26 Impact factor: 3.404
Authors: William F Pritchard; David L Woods; Juan A Esparza-Trujillo; Matthew F Starost; Michal Mauda-Havakuk; Andrew S Mikhail; Ivane Bakhutashvili; Shelby Leonard; Elizabeth C Jones; Venkatesh Krishnasamy; John W Karanian; Bradford J Wood Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Andrew S Mikhail; William F Pritchard; Ayele H Negussie; Venkatesh P Krishnasamy; Daniel B Amchin; John G Thompson; Paul G Wakim; David Woods; Ivane Bakhutashvili; Juan A Esparza-Trujillo; John W Karanian; Sean L Willis; Andrew L Lewis; Elliot B Levy; Bradford J Wood Journal: Radiology Date: 2018-08-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Andrea C Cortes; Hideyuki Nishiofuku; Urszula Polak; Adeeb A Minhaj; Mirtha S Lopez; Kimihiko Kichikawa; Aliya Qayyum; Elizabeth M Whitley; Rony Avritscher Journal: Nanomedicine Date: 2021-09-24 Impact factor: 6.096