Advertisement

Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 44, Issue 2, pp 568–575 | Cite as

Lower energy levels and iodine-based material decomposition images increase pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma conspicuity on rapid kV-switching dual-energy CT

  • Serdar AslanEmail author
  • Ilkay Camlidag
  • Mehmet Selim Nural
Article
  • 67 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) is used in the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but it may be inadequate in some cases. Tumor detection can be improved using rapid kV-switching dual-energy CT (rsDECT) and iodine maps. Our aim this study is to evaluate tumor conspicuity in PDAC cases using rsDECT and iodine maps.

Methods

Ninety cases with PDAC were evaluated rsDECT. Tumor contrast (HU) differences, tumor size, CNR (contrast-noise ratio), and noise were measured at 70 keV, individual CNR-energy level, and 45 keV, respectively. Quantitative differences in contrast gain ∆70-CNR and ∆CNR-45 were compared. On iodine maps, the iodine concentration measured in the tumor and parenchyma was normalized to the aorta as normalized iodine concentration (NIC) and compared.

Results

The median optimized viewing energy level was 51 keV. The mean ± SD tumor contrast values were 62 ± 20, 115 ± 48, and 152 ± 48 HU (p < 0.001); the largest axial diameters were 36.6 ± 5.1, 37.9 ± 4.2, and 38.3 ± 3.7 mm (p = 0.015); the CNRs were 1.83 ± 0.72, 3.37 ± 0.93, and 2.36 ± 0.56; and the image noise levels were 23.7 ± 6.8, 39.3 ± 11.6, and 59.5 ± 17.2 (p < 0.001) (p < 0.001) for 70 keV, optimized energy level, and 45 keV, respectively. The mean ± SD contrast gain ∆70-CNR was 63 ± 12; and ∆CNR-45 was 31 ± 26 HU (p < 0.001). NICtumor and NICparenchyma values were 0.62 ± 0.03 and 1.36 ± 0.05 mg/mL, respectively (p = 0.004).

Conclusion

The use of low energy levels on rsDECT and iodine maps improves tumor conspicuity. This situation may be help better detection of pancreatic tumors.

Keywords

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma Rapid kV-switching dual-energy computed tomography İodine concentration 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society (2013) Cancer facts and figures. Atlanta: American Cancer SocietyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rahib L, Smith BD, Aizenberg R, et al. (2014) Projecting cancer incidence and deaths to 2030: the unexpected burden of thyroid, liver, and pancreas cancers in the United States. Cancer Res 74:2913–2921CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sahani DV, Shah ZK, Catalano OA, Boldan GW, Brugge WR (2008) Radiology of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: current status of imaging. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23:23–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Klauss M, Stiller W, Pahn G, et al. (2013) Dual-energy perfusion-CT of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Eur J Radiol 82:208–214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Callery MP, Chang KJ, Fishman EK, et al. (2009) Pretreatment assessment of resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: expert consensus statement. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1727–1733CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grözinger G, Grözinger A, Horger M (2014) The role of volume perfusion CT in the diagnosis of pathologies of the pancreas. Fortschr Röntgenstr 186:1082–1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gangi S, Fletcher JG, Nathan MA, et al. (2004) Time interval between abnormalities seen on CT and the clinical diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: retrospective review of CT scans obtained before diagnosis. Am J Roentgenol 82:897–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Prokesch RW, Chow LC, Beaulieu CF, Bammer R, Jeffrey RB (2002) Isoattenuating pancreatic adenocarcinoma at multi–detector row CT: secondary signs. Radiology 224:764–768CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim JH, Park SH, Yu ES, et al. (2010) Visually isoattenuating pancreatic adenocarcinoma at dynamic-enhanced CT: frequency, clinical and pathologic characteristics, and diagnosis at imaging examinations. Radiology 257:87–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Macari M, Spieler B, Kim D, et al. (2010) Dual-source dual-energy MDCT of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: initial observations with data generated at 80 kVp and at simulated weighted-average 120 kVp. Am J Roentgenol 194:27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Graser A, Johnson TR, Chandarana H, Macari H (2009) Dual-energy CT: preliminary observations and potential clinical applications in the abdomen. Eur Radiol 19:13–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson TR, Krauss B, Sedlmair M, et al. (2007) Material differentiation by dual energy CT: initial experience. Eur Radiol 17:1510–1517CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fletcher JG, Takahashi N, Hartman R, et al. (2009) Dual-energy and dual-source CT: is there a role in the abdomen and pelvis? Radiol Clin North Am 47:41–57CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patel BN, Thomas JV, Lockhart ME, Berland LL, Morgan DE (2013) Single-source dual-energy spectral multidetector CT of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: optimization of energy level viewing significantly increases lesion contrast. Clin Radiol 68:148–154CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H, et al. (2006) First performance evaluation of a dual source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 16:256–268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McNamara MM, Little MD, Alexander LF, et al. (2015) Multireader evaluation of lesion conspicuity in small pancreatic adenocarcinomas: complimentary value of iodine material density and low keV simulated monoenergetic images using multiphasic rapid kVp-switching dual energy CT. Abdom Imaging 40(5):1230–1240CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lu DSK, Vedantham S, Krasny RM, et al. (1996) Two phase helical CT for pancreatic tumours: pancreatic versus hepatic phase enhancement of tumour, pancreas and vascular structures. Radiology 199:697–701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Radiology ClinicTurhal State HospitalTokatTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Radiology, Faculty of MedicineOndokuz Mayis UniversitySamsunTurkey

Personalised recommendations