1
|
Xie T, Liu W, Chen L, Zhang Z, Chen Y, Wang Y, Deng W, Tang W, Zhou Z. Head-to-head comparison of contrast-enhanced CT, dual-layer spectral-detector CT, and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR in detecting neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases. Eur J Radiol 2024; 181:111710. [PMID: 39241307 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111710] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2024] [Revised: 04/27/2024] [Accepted: 08/27/2024] [Indexed: 09/09/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE To explore the optimal of kiloelectron voltage (keV) of virtual monoenergetic imaging (VMI) of dual-layer spectral-detector CT (DLCT) in detecting neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases (NETLM) and to investigate diagnostic performance of polyenergetic images (PEI), DLCT, and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR. METHODS Seventy-two patients with suspected NETLM who underwent DLCT and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR were retrospectively enrolled. Tumor signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were compared between PEI and VMI at 40-140 keV. Two radiologists read the CT examinations with and without VMI separately in consensus. Two other radiologists read the Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR in consensus. The diagnostic performance was evaluated. Reference standard was histopathology, follow-up, and interpretation of all available imaging. RESULTS The highest SNR and CNR were observed at VMI40keV, significantly higher than PEI in the arterial and venous phases (all P<0.01). A total of 477 lesions were identified (396 metastases, 81 benign lesions). Per-lesion AUC was 0.86, 0.91, and 0.97 (PEI, DLCT, and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR, respectively). Sensitivity of PEI, DLCT, and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI were 0.76, 0.86, and 0.95, respectively. DLCT significantly improved sensitivity compared to PEI. MR had significantly higher sensitivity than DLCT and PEI. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the difference in diagnostic performance was concentrated on lesions < 10 mm. CONCLUSION The image quality of VMI40keV is higher than that of PEI. DLCT with VMI40keV provides better diagnostic sensitivity for NETLM detection than PEI. Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR yielded the best diagnostic performance for NETLM detection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tiansong Xie
- Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Lei Chen
- Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (Minhang Campus), Shanghai, China
| | - Zehua Zhang
- Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (Minhang Campus), Shanghai, China
| | - Yi Chen
- Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China; Shanghai Institute of Medical Imaging, Shanghai, China
| | - Yu Wang
- Clinical & Technical Support, Philips Healthcare, Shanghai, China
| | - Weiwei Deng
- Clinical & Technical Support, Philips Healthcare, Shanghai, China
| | - Wei Tang
- Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
| | - Zhengrong Zhou
- Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China; Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (Minhang Campus), Shanghai, China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Görgec B, Hansen IS, Kemmerich G, Syversveen T, Abu Hilal M, Belt EJT, Bosscha K, Burgmans MC, Cappendijk VC, D'Hondt M, Edwin B, van Erkel AR, Gielkens HAJ, Grünhagen DJ, Gobardhan PD, Hartgrink HH, Horsthuis K, Klompenhouwer EG, Kok NFM, Kint PAM, Kuhlmann K, Leclercq WKG, Lips DJ, Lutin B, Maas M, Marsman HA, Meijerink M, Meyer Y, Morone M, Peringa J, Sijberden JP, van Delden OM, van den Bergh JE, Vanhooymissen IJS, Vermaas M, Willemssen FEJA, Dijkgraaf MGW, Bossuyt PM, Swijnenburg RJ, Fretland ÅA, Verhoef C, Besselink MG, Stoker J. MRI in addition to CT in patients scheduled for local therapy of colorectal liver metastases (CAMINO): an international, multicentre, prospective, diagnostic accuracy trial. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:137-146. [PMID: 38081200 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00572-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2023] [Revised: 10/22/2023] [Accepted: 10/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/07/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Guidelines are inconclusive on whether contrast-enhanced MRI using gadoxetic acid and diffusion-weighted imaging should be added routinely to CT in the investigation of patients with colorectal liver metastases who are scheduled for curative liver resection or thermal ablation, or both. Although contrast-enhanced MRI is reportedly superior than contrast-enhanced CT in the detection and characterisation of colorectal liver metastases, its effect on clinical patient management is unknown. We aimed to assess the clinical effect of an additional liver contrast-enhanced MRI on local treatment plan in patients with colorectal liver metastases amenable to local treatment, based on contrast-enhanced CT. METHODS We did an international, multicentre, prospective, incremental diagnostic accuracy trial in 14 liver surgery centres in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and Italy. Participants were aged 18 years or older with histological proof of colorectal cancer, a WHO performance status score of 0-4, and primary or recurrent colorectal liver metastases, who were scheduled for local therapy based on contrast-enhanced CT. All patients had contrast-enhanced CT and liver contrast-enhanced MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging and gadoxetic acid as a contrast agent before undergoing local therapy. The primary outcome was change in the local clinical treatment plan (decided by the individual clinics) on the basis of liver contrast-enhanced MRI findings, analysed in the intention-to-image population. The minimal clinically important difference in the proportion of patients who would have change in their local treatment plan due to an additional liver contrast-enhanced MRI was 10%. This study is closed and registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL8039. FINDINGS Between Dec 17, 2019, and July 31, 2021, 325 patients with colorectal liver metastases were assessed for eligibility. 298 patients were enrolled and included in the intention-to-treat population, including 177 males (59%) and 121 females (41%) with planned local therapy based on contrast-enhanced CT. A change in the local treatment plan based on liver contrast-enhanced MRI findings was observed in 92 (31%; 95% CI 26-36) of 298 patients. Changes were made for 40 patients (13%) requiring more extensive local therapy, 11 patients (4%) requiring less extensive local therapy, and 34 patients (11%) in whom the indication for curative-intent local therapy was revoked, including 26 patients (9%) with too extensive disease and eight patients (3%) with benign lesions on liver contrast-enhanced MRI (confirmed by a median follow-up of 21·0 months [IQR 17·5-24·0]). INTERPRETATION Liver contrast-enhanced MRI should be considered in all patients scheduled for local treatment for colorectal liver metastases on the basis of contrast-enhanced CT imaging. FUNDING The Dutch Cancer Society and Bayer AG - Pharmaceuticals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Burak Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ingrid S Hansen
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Gunter Kemmerich
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Trygve Syversveen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - Eric J T Belt
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands
| | - Mark C Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | | | - Mathieu D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Bjørn Edwin
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Arian R van Erkel
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Hugo A J Gielkens
- Department of Radiology, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Henk H Hartgrink
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Karin Horsthuis
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Peter A M Kint
- Department of Radiology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, Netherlands
| | - Koert Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Bart Lutin
- Department of Radiology, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn Meijerink
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Yannick Meyer
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Mario Morone
- Department of Radiology, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - Jan Peringa
- Department of Radiology, OLVG, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Jasper P Sijberden
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Otto M van Delden
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Janneke E van den Bergh
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Inge J S Vanhooymissen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Maarten Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, Netherlands
| | | | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health, Methodology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Patrick M Bossuyt
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Åsmund A Fretland
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Jaap Stoker
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Borges AP, Antunes C, Caseiro-Alves F. Spectral CT: Current Liver Applications. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:diagnostics13101673. [PMID: 37238163 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13101673] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2023] [Revised: 05/02/2023] [Accepted: 05/04/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Using two different energy levels, dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) allows for material differentiation, improves image quality and iodine conspicuity, and allows researchers the opportunity to determine iodine contrast and radiation dose reduction. Several commercialized platforms with different acquisition techniques are constantly being improved. Furthermore, DECT clinical applications and advantages are continually being reported in a wide range of diseases. We aimed to review the current applications of and challenges in using DECT in the treatment of liver diseases. The greater contrast provided by low-energy reconstructed images and the capability of iodine quantification have been mostly valuable for lesion detection and characterization, accurate staging, treatment response assessment, and thrombi characterization. Material decomposition techniques allow for the non-invasive quantification of fat/iron deposition and fibrosis. Reduced image quality with larger body sizes, cross-vendor and scanner variability, and long reconstruction time are among the limitations of DECT. Promising techniques for improving image quality with lower radiation dose include the deep learning imaging reconstruction method and novel spectral photon-counting computed tomography.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ana P Borges
- Medical Imaging Department, Coimbra University Hospitals, 3004-561 Coimbra, Portugal
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-504 Coimbra, Portugal
- Academic and Clinical Centre of Coimbra, 3000-370 Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Célia Antunes
- Medical Imaging Department, Coimbra University Hospitals, 3004-561 Coimbra, Portugal
- Academic and Clinical Centre of Coimbra, 3000-370 Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Filipe Caseiro-Alves
- Medical Imaging Department, Coimbra University Hospitals, 3004-561 Coimbra, Portugal
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-504 Coimbra, Portugal
- Academic and Clinical Centre of Coimbra, 3000-370 Coimbra, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|