Literature DB >> 9071291

Helical CT for detecting focal liver lesions in patients with breast carcinoma: comparison of noncontrast phase, hepatic arterial phase, and portal venous phase.

M G Frederick1, E K Paulson, R C Nelson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Our goal was to compare noncontrast phase (NCP), hepatic arterial phase (HAP), and portal venous phase (PVP) helical CT for the detection of focal liver lesions in patients at risk for having metastases from breast carcinoma.
METHOD: Eighty-four consecutive CT scans in 80 women with known or suspected liver metastases from breast carcinoma were prospectively evaluated with triple phase helical CT. After NCP, Isovue 300 was administered at 3 ml/s for 40 s, then 2 ml/s for 30 s, with scan delays of 25 s (HAP) and 76 s (PVP), slice thickness of 7 mm, and pitch of 1:1. Two reviewers evaluated each phase for focal liver lesions in a blinded and random fashion followed by side-by-side review for consensus.
RESULTS: By consensus, 40 CT scans were normal and 44 CT scans had a total of 105 lesions (46 lesions were graded malignant). PVP detected 39 (85%), HAP 27 (59%), and NCP 28 (61%) malignant lesions. Two malignant lesions were seen only on HAP, 3 only on NCP, and 10 only on PVP. The remainder of lesions were seen on more than one phase. PVP was graded best for detecting lesions in 27 (61%), HAP best in 7 (16%), NCP best in 4 (9%), and PVP equivalent to HAP in 6 (14%) of the 44 cases with lesions.
CONCLUSION: In our breast cancer patient population, PVP was superior to NCP and HAP for liver lesion detection. Because no CT scan was converted from negative to positive due to the addition of NCP or HAP, the routine use of these two phases cannot be justified when the clinical concern is the presence or absence of metastases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9071291     DOI: 10.1097/00004728-199703000-00012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr        ISSN: 0363-8715            Impact factor:   1.826


  9 in total

1.  Standardisation of liver MDCT by tracking liver parenchyma enhancement to trigger imaging.

Authors:  H Brodoefel; A Tognolini; G A Zamboni; S Gourtsoyianni; C D Claussen; V Raptopoulos
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-11-05       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Re-evaluation of detectability of liver metastases by contrast-enhanced CT: added value of hepatic arterial phase imaging.

Authors:  Yukiko Honda; Toru Higaki; Haruka Higashihori; Yoshio Monzen; Fuminari Tatsugami; Shuji Date; Kazuo Awai
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 2.374

Review 3.  [Diagnostic radiology of liver tumors. Part 1: General disease aspects and radiological procedures].

Authors:  G Layer; M Bohrer
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Value of CT-Based Radiomics in Predicating the Efficacy of Anti-HER2 Therapy for Patients With Liver Metastases From Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Miao He; Yu Hu; Dongdong Wang; Meili Sun; Huijie Li; Peng Yan; Yingxu Meng; Ran Zhang; Li Li; Dexin Yu; Xiuwen Wang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 5.738

5.  Diagnostic accuracy of non-contrast abdominopelvic computed tomography scans in follow-up of breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Sang Yu Nam; Su Joa Ahn; Young Rock Jang; Yong Soon Chun; Heung Kyu Park; Seung Joon Choi; Hye Young Choi; Jeong Ho Kim
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-12-11       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Liver metastases: imaging considerations for protocol development with multislice CT (MSCT).

Authors:  Paul M Silverman
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2006-11-08       Impact factor: 3.909

7.  Non-contrast and portal venous phase computed tomography in breast cancer hepatic metastases: comparison of tumor measurements and impact on response assessment.

Authors:  Brian Flemming; Mark D Kovacs; Andrew Hardie; Melissa Picard; Philip F Burchett; Heather Collins; Douglas H Sheafor
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2021-02-27

8.  Is Non-Contrast CT Adequate for the Evaluation of Hepatic Metastasis in Patients Who Cannot Receive Iodinated Contrast Media?

Authors:  Han Bum Jee; Min Jung Park; Hye Sun Lee; Mi-Suk Park; Myeong-Jin Kim; Yong Eun Chung
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  The role of unenhanced phase of the liver in the scanning protocol of metastatic breast cancer: implications for sensitivity, response evaluation and size measurement.

Authors:  Juan José Arenas-Jiménez; Elena García-Garrigós; Mariana Cecilia Planells-Alduvín
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2021-11-19       Impact factor: 2.991

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.