Evaluation of the liver with virtual non-contrast: single institution study in 149 patients undergoing TAVR planning.
Journal
The British journal of radiology
ISSN: 1748-880X
Titre abrégé: Br J Radiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0373125
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Feb 2020
01 Feb 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
12
12
2019
medline:
6
2
2020
entrez:
12
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate accuracy of virtual-non-contrast images (VNC) compared to true-unenhanced-images (TNC) for evaluation of liver attenuation acquired using spectral-detector CT (SDCT). 149 patients who underwent multiphase transcatheter-aortic-valve-replacement (TAVR) SDCT-examinations [unenhanced-chest (TNC), CT-angiography chest (CTA-chest, early arterial-phase) and abdomen (CTA-abdomen, additional early arterial-phase after a second injection of contrast media)] were retrospectively included. VNC of CTA-chest (VNC-chest) and CTA-abdomen (VNC-abdomen) were reconstructed and compared to TNC. Region of interest-based measurement of mean attenuation (Hounsfield unit, HU) was applied in the following regions: liver, spleen, abdominal aorta and paraspinal muscle. VNC accuracy was high in the liver, spleen, abdominal aorta and muscle for abdomen-scanning. For the liver, average attenuation was 59.0 ± 9.1 HU for TNC and 72.6 ± 9.5 HU for CTA-abdomen. Liver attenuation in VNC-abdomen (59.1 ± 6.4 HU) was not significantly different from attenuation in TNC ( VNC performed well in a large cohort of TAVR-examinations yielding equivalent mean attenuations to TNC; however, application of this technique might be limited when no or very little contrast media is present in parenchyma, more precisely in an early arterial-phase of the liver. This study showed that VNC can be reliably applied in cardiac protocols when certain limitations are considered.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31825655
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20190701
pmc: PMC7055436
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
20190701Références
Cancer Imaging. 2017 Mar 4;17(1):9
pubmed: 28259177
Eur J Radiol. 2018 Jul;104:108-114
pubmed: 29857855
Eur Radiol. 2017 Oct;27(10):4324-4335
pubmed: 28289937
Eur J Endocrinol. 2016 Aug;175(2):G1-G34
pubmed: 27390021
Radiology. 2008 Nov;249(2):682-91
pubmed: 18780822
Eur Radiol. 2019 Aug;29(8):4228-4238
pubmed: 30649598
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 May;188(5):1307-12
pubmed: 17449775
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003 May;15(5):539-43
pubmed: 12702913
Radiographics. 2009 Sep-Oct;29(5):1253-77
pubmed: 19755595
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Apr;202(4):752-8
pubmed: 24660702
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018 May;210(5):1042-1058
pubmed: 29528711
J Am Coll Radiol. 2010 Oct;7(10):754-73
pubmed: 20889105
Eur Radiol. 2003 Dec;13 Suppl 5:M14-20
pubmed: 14989606
Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 1995 Feb;16(1):16-33
pubmed: 7718279
Arch Intern Med. 2009 Dec 14;169(22):2071-7
pubmed: 20008689
Radiology. 2004 Jan;230(1):276-80
pubmed: 14695401
Radiology. 2019 May;291(2):381-390
pubmed: 30860450
Clin Radiol. 2018 Jun;73(6):594.e7-594.e15
pubmed: 29526439
Hepatology. 2004 Dec;40(6):1387-95
pubmed: 15565570
Invest Radiol. 2019 Jan;54(1):1-6
pubmed: 30096063
J Card Surg. 2018 Aug;33(8):424-430
pubmed: 29911307
Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed. 2013 Dec;98(6):239
pubmed: 24163357
J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 Sep;19(9):1713-24
pubmed: 25917535
Eur Radiol. 2018 Nov;28(11):4524-4533
pubmed: 29725834
Radiology. 2006 Apr;239(1):105-12
pubmed: 16484355
Radiology. 2015 Sep;276(3):637-53
pubmed: 26302388
Eur J Radiol. 2012 Mar;81(3):e398-405
pubmed: 22236702
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018 Dec;39(12):2205-2210
pubmed: 30409850
Radiol Res Pract. 2013;2013:482403
pubmed: 23984065
Eur J Radiol. 2019 Dec;121:108733
pubmed: 31739270
Ann Surg. 2007 Jan;245(1):20-30
pubmed: 17197961
Radiology. 2013 Dec;269(3):650-69
pubmed: 24261496
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2017 Mar;42(3):702-709
pubmed: 28084546