Gastrointestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms (GI-NENs): hot topics in morphological, functional, and prognostic imaging

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are heterogeneous tumours with a common phenotype descended from the diffuse endocrine system. NENs are found nearly anywhere in the body but the most frequent location is the gastrointestinal tract. Gastrointestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms (GI-NENs) are rather uncommon, representing around 2% of all gastrointestinal tumours and 20–30% of all primary neoplasms of the small bowel. GI-NENs have various clinical manifestations due to the different substances they can produce; some of these tumours appear to be associated with familial syndromes, such as multiple endocrine neoplasm and neurofibromatosis type 1. The current WHO classification (2019) divides NENs into three major categories: well-differentiated NENs, poorly differentiated NENs, and mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms. The diagnosis, localization, and staging of GI-NENs include morphology and functional imaging, above all contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), and in the field of nuclear medicine imaging, a key role is played by ⁶⁸Ga-labelled-somatostatin analogues (⁶⁸Ga-DOTA-peptides) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/TC). In this review of recent literature, we described the objectives of morphological/functional imaging and potential future possibilities of prognostic imaging in the assessment of GI-NENs.

Motion artefacts in cone beam CT: an in vitro study about the effects on the images

OBJECTIVE

In cone beam CT (CBCT), imperfect patient immobility, caused by involuntary movements, is one of the most important causes of artefacts and image quality degradation. Various works in literature address this topic, but seldom is the nature of the movement correlated with the type of artefact and the image degradation in a systematic manner, and the correlation analyzed and explained.

METHODS

All three types of movements that can occur during a scan-nodding, tilting and rolling-were applied to a dry skull, in various manners from abrupt to gradual through the entire scan, at different times and angles, over a wide range of displacements. 84 scans were performed, with different skull movements, and the resulting images examined by two skilled radiologists, rated in a four-point scale and statistically analyzed. A commercial CBCT machine was used, featuring supine patient positioning.

RESULTS

Different types of movements induce different artefacts, in different parts of the anatomy. In general, movement of short duration may lead to double contours (bilateral or monolateral depending upon the angle of the scan at which they occur), whereas gradual movements result into blurring.

CONCLUSION

Not all movements cause motion artefacts that equally jeopardize the image. Rolling is the type of movement that most severely affects the image diagnostic value.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

These findings may help practitioners to identify the causes of motion artefacts and the resulting image degradation, and remediate them, and manufacturers to improve the patient-positioning devices.