Literature DB >> 31115620

Liver CT perfusion: which is the relevant delay that reduces radiation dose and maintains diagnostic accuracy?

Alessandro Bevilacqua1,2, Silvia Malavasi2,3, Valérie Vilgrain4,5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: High radiation dose during CT perfusion (CTp) studies contributes to prevent CTp application in daily clinical practice. This work evaluates the consequences of scan delay on perfusion parameters and provides guidelines to help reducing the radiation dose by choosing the most appropriate delay.
METHODS: Fifty-nine patients (34 men, 25 women; mean age 68 ± 12) with colorectal cancer, without underlying liver disease, underwent liver CTp, with the acquisition starting simultaneously with iodinated contrast agent injection. Blood flow (BF) and hepatic perfusion index (HPI) were computed on the acquired examinations and compared with those of the same examinations when a variable scan delay (τ) is introduced. Dose length product, CT dose index, and effective dose were also computed on original and delayed examinations.
RESULTS: Altogether, three groups of delays (τ ≤ 4 s, 5 s ≤ τ ≤ 9 s, τ ≥ 10 s) were identified, yielding increasing radiation dose saving (RDS) (RDS ≤ 9.5%, 11.9% ≤ RDS ≤ 21.4%, RDS ≥ 23.8%) and decreasing perfusion accuracy (high (τ ≤ 4 s), medium (5 s ≤ τ ≤ 9 s), low (τ ≥ 10 s)). In particular, single-input and arterial BF and HPI were more insensitive to delay as regards the absolute variations (only 1 ml/min/100 g and 1%, respectively, for τ ≤ 9 s), than portal and total BF.
CONCLUSION: Using delays lower than 4 s does not change perfusion accuracy and conveys unnecessary dose to patients. Conversely, starting the acquisition 9 s after contrast agent injection yields a RDS of about 21%, with no significant losses in perfusion accuracy. KEY POINTS: • Scan delays lower than 4 s do not alter perfusion accuracy and deliver an unnecessary radiation dose to patients. • Radiation dose delivered to patients can be reduced by 21.4% by introducing a 9-s scan delay, while keeping accurate perfusion values. • Using scan delays higher than 10 s, some perfusion parameters (portal and total BF) were inaccurate.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colorectal neoplasms; Contrast media; Liver diseases; Radiation dosage; Tomography, X-ray computed

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31115620     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06259-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  28 in total

1.  Effect of pre-enhancement set point on computed tomographic perfusion values in normal liver and metastases to the liver from neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Chaan S Ng; Adam G Chandler; James C Yao; Delise H Herron; Ella F Anderson; Chusilp Charnsangavej; Brian P Hobbs
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.826

Review 2.  Evolution in Computed Tomography: The Battle for Speed and Dose.

Authors:  Michael M Lell; Joachim E Wildberger; Hatem Alkadhi; John Damilakis; Marc Kachelriess
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 6.016

3.  Computed tomography perfusion imaging for monitoring transarterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Herman P Marquez; Amar Karalli; Holger Haubenreisser; Rishi P Mathew; Hatem Alkadhi; Torkel B Brismar; Thomas Henzler; Michael A Fischer
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2017-03-24       Impact factor: 3.528

Review 4.  Evaluation of hepatic fibrosis: a review from the society of abdominal radiology disease focus panel.

Authors:  Jeanne M Horowitz; Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Richard L Ehman; Kartik Jhaveri; Patrick Kamath; Michael A Ohliger; Anthony E Samir; Alvin C Silva; Bachir Taouli; Michael S Torbenson; Michael L Wells; Benjamin Yeh; Frank H Miller
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2017-08

5.  CT Radiation: Key Concepts for Gentle and Wise Use.

Authors:  Mannudeep K Kalra; Aaron D Sodickson; William W Mayo-Smith
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  CT Perfusion for Early Response Evaluation of Radiofrequency Ablation of Focal Liver Lesions: First Experience.

Authors:  Herman P Marquez; Gilbert Puippe; Rishi Philip Mathew; Hatem Alkadhi; Thomas Pfammatter; Michael A Fischer
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 2.740

7.  Early response evaluation using CT-perfusion one day after transarterial chemoembolization for HCC predicts treatment response and long-term disease control.

Authors:  Dietmar Tamandl; Fredrik Waneck; Wolfgang Sieghart; Sylvia Unterhumer; Claus Kölblinger; Pascal Baltzer; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Christian Loewe
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 3.528

Review 8.  CT perfusion of the liver: principles and applications in oncology.

Authors:  Se Hyung Kim; Aya Kamaya; Jürgen K Willmann
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Quantitative assessment of effects of motion compensation for liver and lung tumors in CT perfusion.

Authors:  Alessandro Bevilacqua; Domenico Barone; Silvia Malavasi; Giampaolo Gavelli
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 10.  Perfusion CT imaging of the liver: review of clinical applications.

Authors:  Hayri Oğul; Mecit Kantarcı; Berhan Genç; Berhan Pirimoğlu; Neşat Cullu; Yeşim Kızrak; Omer Yılmaz; Nevzat Karabulut
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.630

View more
  2 in total

1.  Early Assessment of Response to Radiofrequency Ablation With CT Perfusion Imaging in Rabbit VX2 Liver Tumor Model.

Authors:  Xiaofei Yue; Xiangjun Dong; Mengting Huang; Hongli Yang; Kun Qian; Changhong Yi; Osamah Alwalid; Yanqiao Ren; Ping Han; Qian Li
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 2.  Current Imaging Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Evangelos Chartampilas; Vasileios Rafailidis; Vivian Georgopoulou; Georgios Kalarakis; Adam Hatzidakis; Panos Prassopoulos
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-18       Impact factor: 6.575

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.