评估定量计算机断层扫描灌注参数在区分肝细胞癌和其他肝肿瘤方面的作用。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Sudipta Mohakud, Vimal Sreejith, Nerbadyswari Deep Bag, Susama Patra, Manas Kumar Panigrahi, Pankaj Kumar, Brahmadatta Pattnaik, Tanmay Dutta, Suprava Naik, Taraprasad Tripathy, Ranjan Kumar Patel, M Divya, Dillip Kumar Muduly, Madhabananda Kar
{"title":"评估定量计算机断层扫描灌注参数在区分肝细胞癌和其他肝肿瘤方面的作用。","authors":"Sudipta Mohakud, Vimal Sreejith, Nerbadyswari Deep Bag, Susama Patra, Manas Kumar Panigrahi, Pankaj Kumar, Brahmadatta Pattnaik, Tanmay Dutta, Suprava Naik, Taraprasad Tripathy, Ranjan Kumar Patel, M Divya, Dillip Kumar Muduly, Madhabananda Kar","doi":"10.1007/s00261-024-04688-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Differentiating the various liver tumors is pivotal due to distinct treatments and prognoses. Sometimes, it is difficult to accurately differentiate hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from other hepatic neoplasms non-invasively because of overlap in the triple-phase contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) features, contraindication of an invasive biopsy, particularly in multifocal lesions with cirrhosis or ascites or when an MRI is unavailable or not feasible.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the utility of CT perfusion (CTP) parameters in differentiating HCC from other hepatic neoplasms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-eight patients with suspicious liver lesions underwent CTP imaging. Perfusion parameters were assessed within the tumor and the adjacent normal liver using the post-processing software. Statistical significance (p-value), sensitivity, and specificity value of the individual parameters were assessed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was done to threshold values of the parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean values of perfusion parameters like HAP (hepatic arterial perfusion), PVP (portal venous perfusion), HPI (hepatic perfusion index), BF (blood flow), BV (blood volume), MTT (mean transit time), and TTP (time to peak) were statistically significant (p-value < 0.05) between HCC and other hepatic neoplasms. Among the parameters, BV had the greatest AUC of 0.938. With a threshold value of 8.3 ml/100 ml/min, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.6% and 80%, respectively, in distinguishing HCC from other hepatic neoplasms. HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating hypervascular metastases from HCCs. HAP, HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating HCC from hypovascular metastases. BF and BV were significant in differentiating hypervascular from hypovascular metastases. HAP, PVP, HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating HCCs from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CTP provides a quantitative, non-invasive method to differentiate HCC from other hepatic neoplasms with high efficacy. It can be a problem-solving tool when a conventional CECT scan cannot characterize a lesion as HCC, where biopsy is not feasible.</p>","PeriodicalId":7126,"journal":{"name":"Abdominal Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the role of quantitative computed tomography perfusion parameters in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from other hepatic neoplasms.\",\"authors\":\"Sudipta Mohakud, Vimal Sreejith, Nerbadyswari Deep Bag, Susama Patra, Manas Kumar Panigrahi, Pankaj Kumar, Brahmadatta Pattnaik, Tanmay Dutta, Suprava Naik, Taraprasad Tripathy, Ranjan Kumar Patel, M Divya, Dillip Kumar Muduly, Madhabananda Kar\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00261-024-04688-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Differentiating the various liver tumors is pivotal due to distinct treatments and prognoses. Sometimes, it is difficult to accurately differentiate hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from other hepatic neoplasms non-invasively because of overlap in the triple-phase contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) features, contraindication of an invasive biopsy, particularly in multifocal lesions with cirrhosis or ascites or when an MRI is unavailable or not feasible.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the utility of CT perfusion (CTP) parameters in differentiating HCC from other hepatic neoplasms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-eight patients with suspicious liver lesions underwent CTP imaging. Perfusion parameters were assessed within the tumor and the adjacent normal liver using the post-processing software. Statistical significance (p-value), sensitivity, and specificity value of the individual parameters were assessed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was done to threshold values of the parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean values of perfusion parameters like HAP (hepatic arterial perfusion), PVP (portal venous perfusion), HPI (hepatic perfusion index), BF (blood flow), BV (blood volume), MTT (mean transit time), and TTP (time to peak) were statistically significant (p-value < 0.05) between HCC and other hepatic neoplasms. Among the parameters, BV had the greatest AUC of 0.938. With a threshold value of 8.3 ml/100 ml/min, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.6% and 80%, respectively, in distinguishing HCC from other hepatic neoplasms. HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating hypervascular metastases from HCCs. HAP, HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating HCC from hypovascular metastases. BF and BV were significant in differentiating hypervascular from hypovascular metastases. HAP, PVP, HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating HCCs from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CTP provides a quantitative, non-invasive method to differentiate HCC from other hepatic neoplasms with high efficacy. It can be a problem-solving tool when a conventional CECT scan cannot characterize a lesion as HCC, where biopsy is not feasible.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Abdominal Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Abdominal Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-024-04688-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Abdominal Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-024-04688-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:由于治疗方法和预后不同,区分各种肝脏肿瘤至关重要。有时,由于三相对比增强计算机断层扫描(CECT)特征的重叠、侵入性活检的禁忌症,特别是伴有肝硬化或腹水的多灶性病变或无法或不能进行磁共振成像检查时,很难通过无创方法准确区分肝细胞癌(HCC)和其他肝肿瘤:评估CT灌注(CTP)参数在区分HCC和其他肝肿瘤方面的作用:方法:48 名肝脏有可疑病变的患者接受了 CTP 成像检查。使用后处理软件评估肿瘤内部和邻近正常肝脏的灌注参数。评估了各参数的统计学意义(P 值)、灵敏度和特异性值。对参数的阈值进行了接收器操作特征(ROC)曲线分析:结果:HAP(肝动脉灌注)、PVP(门静脉灌注)、HPI(肝灌注指数)、BF(血流量)、BV(血容量)、MTT(平均通过时间)和 TTP(达到峰值的时间)等灌注参数的平均值均具有统计学意义(P 值 结论:CTP 提供了一种定量的、非侵入性的肝脏灌注检测方法:CTP 提供了一种定量、无创的方法来区分 HCC 和其他肝肿瘤,而且效果显著。当传统的 CECT 扫描无法确定病变为 HCC,又无法进行活组织检查时,CTP 可作为一种解决问题的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating the role of quantitative computed tomography perfusion parameters in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from other hepatic neoplasms.

Background: Differentiating the various liver tumors is pivotal due to distinct treatments and prognoses. Sometimes, it is difficult to accurately differentiate hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from other hepatic neoplasms non-invasively because of overlap in the triple-phase contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) features, contraindication of an invasive biopsy, particularly in multifocal lesions with cirrhosis or ascites or when an MRI is unavailable or not feasible.

Objectives: To assess the utility of CT perfusion (CTP) parameters in differentiating HCC from other hepatic neoplasms.

Methods: Forty-eight patients with suspicious liver lesions underwent CTP imaging. Perfusion parameters were assessed within the tumor and the adjacent normal liver using the post-processing software. Statistical significance (p-value), sensitivity, and specificity value of the individual parameters were assessed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was done to threshold values of the parameters.

Results: The mean values of perfusion parameters like HAP (hepatic arterial perfusion), PVP (portal venous perfusion), HPI (hepatic perfusion index), BF (blood flow), BV (blood volume), MTT (mean transit time), and TTP (time to peak) were statistically significant (p-value < 0.05) between HCC and other hepatic neoplasms. Among the parameters, BV had the greatest AUC of 0.938. With a threshold value of 8.3 ml/100 ml/min, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.6% and 80%, respectively, in distinguishing HCC from other hepatic neoplasms. HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating hypervascular metastases from HCCs. HAP, HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating HCC from hypovascular metastases. BF and BV were significant in differentiating hypervascular from hypovascular metastases. HAP, PVP, HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating HCCs from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas.

Conclusion: CTP provides a quantitative, non-invasive method to differentiate HCC from other hepatic neoplasms with high efficacy. It can be a problem-solving tool when a conventional CECT scan cannot characterize a lesion as HCC, where biopsy is not feasible.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Abdominal Radiology
Abdominal Radiology Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
334
期刊介绍: Abdominal Radiology seeks to meet the professional needs of the abdominal radiologist by publishing clinically pertinent original, review and practice related articles on the gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts and abdominal interventional and radiologic procedures. Case reports are generally not accepted unless they are the first report of a new disease or condition, or part of a special solicited section. Reasons to Publish Your Article in Abdominal Radiology: · Official journal of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) · Published in Cooperation with: European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) Asian Society of Abdominal Radiology (ASAR) · Efficient handling and Expeditious review · Author feedback is provided in a mentoring style · Global readership · Readers can earn CME credits
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信