Differences Between CT-Perfusion and Biphasic Contrast-enhanced CT for Detection and Characterization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Potential Explanations for Discrepant Cases.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular
/ diagnosis
Contrast Media
Female
Humans
Liver
/ diagnostic imaging
Liver Neoplasms
/ diagnosis
Male
Middle Aged
Perfusion Imaging
/ methods
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Sensitivity and Specificity
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
/ methods
CECT
Contrast-enhanced computed tomography
HCC
PCT
hepatocellular carcinoma
oncological imaging
perfusion CT
Journal
Anticancer research
ISSN: 1791-7530
Titre abrégé: Anticancer Res
Pays: Greece
ID NLM: 8102988
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
07
01
2021
revised:
03
02
2021
accepted:
05
02
2021
entrez:
31
3
2021
pubmed:
1
4
2021
medline:
13
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare the diagnostic value of liver perfusion computed tomography (PCT) and biphasic contrast-enhanced CT (bpCECT) for detection and characterization of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and to identify potential causes for inter-modal discrepancies. In this retrospective study, 162 cases with a total of 325 HCC-typical lesions were evaluated using both PCT and bpCECT (mean time between examinations=15 days, range=0-13 days). HCC diagnosis was performed by multi-modality imaging including lesion growth at follow-up. For PCT, a total acquisition time of 40 s (26 measurements) each 1.5 s using 80 kV and 100 mAs, as well as 50 ml iodine contrast agent (at 5 ml/s) covering the entire liver was used. Mean arterial liver perfusion (ALP), portal venous perfusion (PVP) and hepatic arterial index (HPI) for both tumor and non-involved liver parenchyma; mean blood flow, blood volume and k-trans for tumor were quantified. Tumor localization, and size were registered. bpCECT consisted of unenhanced, arterial (30-33 s delay), and portal-venous (70-75 s) phases performed using 120 kV, 200-250 mAs, thin-slice reformates (<1 mm), 100 ml contrast agent (at 3 ml/s) followed by 50 ml saline flush. Finally, we divided the results according to detection by PCT only (i.e. missed by pbCECT), and by both PCT and pbCECT. PCT detected 272 lesions compared to 217 with bpCECT only. HCCs in liver segments 4 and 5 were significantly better detected by PCT (p<0.005). Furthermore, PCT detected significantly smaller HCCs than did bpCECT (p<0.001). Lesions detected by both methods had significantly higher mean ALP (p=0.03) and HPI (p=0.02), and lower mean PVP (p=0.01). Tumor blood flow, blood volume and k-trans proved not to be significant for lesion detection. The mean ALP, HPI, and PVP in inconspicuous cirrhotic liver were also not significant for lesion detection. The PVP Detection of smaller HCC lesions, lesions located in liver segments 4 and 5, as well as lesions presenting lower ALP and HPI, and higher PVP
Identifiants
pubmed: 33788737
pii: 41/3/1451
doi: 10.21873/anticanres.14903
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1451-1458Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.