1
|
Grudza M, Salinel B, Zeien S, Murphy M, Adkins J, Jensen CT, Bay C, Kodibagkar V, Koo P, Dragovich T, Choti MA, Kundranda M, Syeda-Mahmood T, Wang HZ, Chang J. Methods for improving colorectal cancer annotation efficiency for artificial intelligence-observer training. World J Radiol 2023; 15:359-369. [PMID: 38179201 PMCID: PMC10762523 DOI: 10.4329/wjr.v15.i12.359] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Revised: 11/13/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 12/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Missing occult cancer lesions accounts for the most diagnostic errors in retrospective radiology reviews as early cancer can be small or subtle, making the lesions difficult to detect. Second-observer is the most effective technique for reducing these events and can be economically implemented with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI). AIM To achieve appropriate AI model training, a large annotated dataset is necessary to train the AI models. Our goal in this research is to compare two methods for decreasing the annotation time to establish ground truth: Skip-slice annotation and AI-initiated annotation. METHODS We developed a 2D U-Net as an AI second observer for detecting colorectal cancer (CRC) and an ensemble of 5 differently initiated 2D U-Net for ensemble technique. Each model was trained with 51 cases of annotated CRC computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis, tested with 7 cases, and validated with 20 cases from The Cancer Imaging Archive cases. The sensitivity, false positives per case, and estimated Dice coefficient were obtained for each method of training. We compared the two methods of annotations and the time reduction associated with the technique. The time differences were tested using Friedman's two-way analysis of variance. RESULTS Sparse annotation significantly reduces the time for annotation particularly skipping 2 slices at a time (P < 0.001). Reduction of up to 2/3 of the annotation does not reduce AI model sensitivity or false positives per case. Although initializing human annotation with AI reduces the annotation time, the reduction is minimal, even when using an ensemble AI to decrease false positives. CONCLUSION Our data support the sparse annotation technique as an efficient technique for reducing the time needed to establish the ground truth.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew Grudza
- School of Biological Health and Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, United States
| | - Brandon Salinel
- Department of Radiology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States
| | - Sarah Zeien
- School of Osteopathic Medicine, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ 85206, United States
| | - Matthew Murphy
- School of Osteopathic Medicine, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ 85206, United States
| | - Jake Adkins
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, United States
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, University Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, United States
| | - Curtis Bay
- Department of Interdisciplinary Sciences, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ 85206, United States
| | - Vikram Kodibagkar
- School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, United States
| | - Phillip Koo
- Department of Radiology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States
| | - Tomislav Dragovich
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States
| | - Michael A Choti
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States
| | - Madappa Kundranda
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States
| | | | - Hong-Zhi Wang
- IBM Almaden Research Center, IBM, San Jose, CA 95120, United States
| | - John Chang
- Department of Radiology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ 85234, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Jensen CT, Wong VK, Wagner-Bartak NA, Liu X, Padmanabhan Nair Sobha R, Sun J, Likhari GS, Gupta S. Accuracy of liver metastasis detection and characterization: Dual-energy CT versus single-energy CT with deep learning reconstruction. Eur J Radiol 2023; 168:111121. [PMID: 37806195 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.111121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2023] [Revised: 09/08/2023] [Accepted: 09/27/2023] [Indexed: 10/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess whether image quality differences between SECT (single-energy CT) and DECT (dual-energy CT 70 keV) with equivalent radiation doses result in altered detection and characterization accuracy of liver metastases when using deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR), and whether DECT spectral curve usage improves accuracy of indeterminate lesion characterization. METHODS In this prospective Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study (March through August 2022), adult men and non-pregnant adult women with biopsy-proven colorectal cancer and liver metastases underwent SECT (120 kVp) and a DECT (70 keV) portovenous abdominal CT scan using DLIR in the same breath-hold (Revolution CT ES; GE Healthcare). Participants were excluded if consent could not be obtained, if there were nonequivalent radiation doses between the two scans, or if the examination was cancelled/rescheduled. Three radiologists independently performed lesion detection and characterization during two separate sessions (SECT DLIRmedium and DECT DLIRhigh) as well as reported lesion confidence and overall image quality. Hounsfield units were measured. Spectral HU curves were provided for any lesions rated as indeterminate. McNemar's test was used to test the marginal homogeneity in terms of diagnostic sensitivity, accuracy and lesion detection. A generalized estimating equation method was used for categorical outcomes. RESULTS 30 participants (mean age, 58 years ± 11, 21 men) were evaluated. Mean CTDIvol was 34 mGy for both scans. 141 lesions (124 metastases, 17 benign) with a mean size of 0.8 cm ± 0.3 cm were identified. High scores for image quality (scores of 4 or 5) were not significantly different between DECT (N = 71 out of 90 total scores from the three readers) and SECT (N = 62) (OR, 2.01; 95% CI:0.89, 4.57; P = 0.093). Equivalent image noise to SECT DLIRmed (HU SD 10 ± 2) was obtained with DECT DLIRhigh (HU SD 10 ± 3) (P = 1). There was no significant difference in lesion detection between DECT and SECT (140/141 lesions) (99.3%; 95% CI:96.1%, 100%).The mean lesion confidence scores by each reader were 4.2 ± 1.3, 3.9 ± 1.0, and 4.8 ± 0.8 for SECT and 4.1 ± 1.4, 4.0 ± 1.0, and 4.7 ± 0.8 for DECT (odds ratio [OR], 0.83; 95% CI: 0.62, 1.11; P = 0.21). Small lesion (≤5mm) characterization accuracy on SECT and DECT was 89.1% (95% CI:76.4%, 96.4%; 41/46) and 84.8% (71.1%, 93.7%; 39/46), respectively (P = 0.41). Use of spectral HU lesion curves resulted in 34 correct changes in characterizations and no mischaracterizations. CONCLUSION DECT required a higher strength of DLIR to obtain equivalent noise compared to SECT DLIR. At equivalent radiation doses and image noise, there was no significant difference in subjective image quality or observer lesion performance between DECT (70 keV) and SECT. However, DECT spectral HU curves of indeterminate lesions improved characterization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corey T Jensen
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, USA.
| | - Vincenzo K Wong
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, USA
| | - Nicolaus A Wagner-Bartak
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, USA
| | - Xinming Liu
- Department of Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, USA
| | - Renjith Padmanabhan Nair Sobha
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, USA
| | - Jia Sun
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, USA
| | - Gauruv S Likhari
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, USA
| | - Shiva Gupta
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ahmad M, Sun P, Peterson CB, Anderson MR, Liu X, Morani AC, Jensen CT. Low pitch significantly reduces helical artifacts in abdominal CT. Eur J Radiol 2023; 166:110977. [PMID: 37481832 PMCID: PMC10529376 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.110977] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2023] [Revised: 05/19/2023] [Accepted: 07/11/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE High helical pitch scanning minimizes scan times in CT imaging, and thus also minimizes motion artifact and mis-synchronization with contrast bolus. However, high pitch produces helical artifacts that may adversely affect diagnostic image quality. This study aims to determine the severity and incidence of helical artifacts in abdominal CT imaging and their relation to the helical pitch scan parameter. METHODS To obtain a dataset with varying pitch values, we used CT exam data both internal and external to our center. A cohort of 59 consecutive adult patients receiving an abdomen CT examination at our center with an accompanying prior examination from an external center was selected for retrospective review. Two expert observers performed a blinded rating of helical artifact in each examination using a five-point Likert scale. The incidence of artifacts with respect to the helical pitch was assessed. A generalized linear mixed-effects regression (GLMER) model, with study arm (Internal or External to our center) and helical pitch as the fixed-effect predictor variables, was fit to the artifact ratings, and significance of the predictor variables was tested. RESULTS For a pitch of <0.75, the proportion of exams with mild or worse helical artifacts (Likert scores of 1-3) was <1%. The proportion increased to 16% for exams with pitch between 0.75 and 1.2, and further increased to 78% for exams with a pitch greater than 1.2. Pitch was significantly associated with helical artifact in the GLMER model (p = 2.8 × 10-9), while study arm was not a significant factor (p = 0.76). CONCLUSION The incidence and severity of helical artifact increased with helical pitch. This difference persisted even after accounting for the potential confounding factor of the center where the study was performed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Moiz Ahmad
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States
| | - Peng Sun
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States
| | - Christine B Peterson
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States
| | - Marcus R Anderson
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States
| | - Xinming Liu
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States
| | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Padmanabhan Nair Sobha R, Jensen CT, Waters R, Calimano-Ramirez LF, Virarkar MK. Appendiceal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Comprehensive Review. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2023:00004728-990000000-00239. [PMID: 37574653 DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000001528] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/15/2023]
Abstract
ABSTRACT Appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasm (NEN) is the most common adult appendiceal malignant tumor, constituting 16% of gastrointestinal NENs. They are versatile tumors with varying morphology, immunohistochemistry, secretory properties, and cancer genomics. They are slow growing and clinically silent, to begin with, or present with features of nonspecific vague abdominal pain. Most acute presentations are attributed clinically to appendicitis, with most cases detected incidentally on pathology after an appendectomy. Approximately 40% of them present clinically with features of hormonal excess, which is likened to the functional secretory nature of their parent cell of origin. The symptoms of carcinoid syndrome render their presence clinically evident. However, slow growing and symptomatically silent in its initial stages, high-grade neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine carcinomas of the appendix are aggressive and usually have hepatic and lymph node metastasis at presentation. This review article focuses on imaging characteristics, World Health Organization histopathological classification and grading, American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union or International Cancer Control, European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society staging, European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society standardized guidelines for reporting, data interpretation, early-stage management protocols, and advanced-stage appendiceal NENs. Guidelines are also set for the follow-up and reassessment. The role of targeted radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and high-dose somatostatin analogs in treating advanced disease are discussed, along with types of ablative therapies and liver transplantation for tumor recurrence. The search for newer location-specific biomarkers in NEN is also summarized. Regarding the varying aggressiveness of the tumor, there is a scope for research in the field, with plenty of data yet to be discovered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Corey T Jensen
- From the Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Rebecca Waters
- Department of Pathology and Lab Medicine MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Mayur K Virarkar
- Department of Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Shehata MA, Saad AM, Kamel S, Stanietzky N, Roman-Colon AM, Morani AC, Elsayes KM, Jensen CT. Deep-learning CT reconstruction in clinical scans of the abdomen: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2023; 48:2724-2756. [PMID: 37280374 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-023-03966-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2023] [Revised: 05/13/2023] [Accepted: 05/16/2023] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To perform a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the two most common commercially available deep-learning algorithms for CT. METHODS We used PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science to conduct systematic searches for studies assessing the most common commercially available deep-learning CT reconstruction algorithms: True Fidelity (TF) and Advanced intelligent Clear-IQ Engine (AiCE) in the abdomen of human participants since only these two algorithms currently have adequate published data for robust systematic analysis. RESULTS Forty-four articles fulfilled inclusion criteria. 32 studies evaluated TF and 12 studies assessed AiCE. DLR algorithms produced images with significantly less noise (22-57.3% less than IR) but preserved a desirable noise texture with increased contrast-to-noise ratios and improved lesion detectability on conventional CT. These improvements with DLR were similarly noted in dual-energy CT which was only assessed for a single vendor. Reported radiation reduction potential was 35.1-78.5%. Nine studies assessed observer performance with the two dedicated liver lesion studies being performed on the same vendor reconstruction (TF). These two studies indicate preserved low contrast liver lesion detection (> 5 mm) at CTDIvol 6.8 mGy (BMI 23.5 kg/m2) to 12.2 mGy (BMI 29 kg/m2). If smaller lesion detection and improved lesion characterization is needed, a CTDIvol of 13.6-34.9 mGy is needed in a normal weight to obese population. Mild signal loss and blurring have been reported at high DLR reconstruction strengths. CONCLUSION Deep learning reconstructions significantly improve image quality in CT of the abdomen. Assessment of other dose levels and clinical indications is needed. Careful choice of radiation dose levels is necessary, particularly for small liver lesion assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mostafa A Shehata
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | | | - Serageldin Kamel
- Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Nir Stanietzky
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | | | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Khaled M Elsayes
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Eskildsen DE, Guccione J, Menias CO, Shaaban AM, Morani AC, Shehata MA, Fagan RJ, Singer ED, Abdelaal MA, Jensen CT, Elsayes KM. Perirenal lymphatics: anatomy, pathophysiology, and imaging spectrum of diseases. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2023; 48:2615-2627. [PMID: 37269362 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-023-03948-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
Despite being rarely discussed, perinephric lymphatics are involved in many pathological and benign processes. The lymphatic system in the kidneys has a harmonious dynamic with ureteral and venous outflow, which can result in pathology when this dynamic is disturbed. Although limited by the small size of lymphatics, multiple established and emerging imaging techniques are available to visualize perinephric lymphatics. Manifestations of perirenal pathology may be in the form of dilation of perirenal lymphatics, as with peripelvic cysts and lymphangiectasia. Lymphatic collections may also occur, either congenital or as a sequela of renal surgery or transplantation. The perirenal lymphatics are also intimately involved in lymphoproliferative disorders, such as lymphoma as well as the malignant spread of disease. Although these pathologic entities often have overlapping imaging features, some have distinguishing characteristics that can suggest the diagnosis when paired with the clinical history.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dane E Eskildsen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | | | - Akram M Shaaban
- Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mostafa A Shehata
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Richard J Fagan
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Emad D Singer
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Moamen A Abdelaal
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Khaled M Elsayes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Szczykutowicz TP, Ahmad M, Liu X, Pozniak MA, Lubner MG, Jensen CT. How Do Cancer-Specific Computed Tomography Protocols Compare With the American College of Radiology Dose Index Registry? An Analysis of Computed Tomography Dose at 2 Cancer Centers. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2023; 47:429-436. [PMID: 37185007 PMCID: PMC10199233 DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000001441] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Little guidance exists on how to stratify radiation dose according to diagnostic task. Changing dose for different cancer types is currently not informed by the American College of Radiology Dose Index Registry dose survey. METHODS A total of 9602 patient examinations were pulled from 2 National Cancer Institute designated cancer centers. Computed tomography dose (CTDI vol ) was extracted, and patient water equivalent diameter was calculated. N-way analysis of variance was used to compare the dose levels between 2 protocols used at site 1, and three protocols used at site 2. RESULTS Sites 1 and 2 both independently stratified their doses according to cancer indications in similar ways. For example, both sites used lower doses ( P < 0.001) for follow-up of testicular cancer, leukemia, and lymphoma. Median dose at median patient size from lowest to highest dose level for site 1 were 17.9 (17.7-18.0) mGy (mean [95% confidence interval]) and 26.8 (26.2-27.4) mGy. For site 2, they were 12.1 (10.6-13.7) mGy, 25.5 (25.2-25.7) mGy, and 34.2 (33.8-34.5) mGy. Both sites had higher doses ( P < 0.001) between their routine and high-image-quality protocols, with an increase of 48% between these doses for site 1 and 25% for site 2. High-image-quality protocols were largely applied for detection of low-contrast liver lesions or subtle pelvic pathology. CONCLUSIONS We demonstrated that 2 cancer centers independently choose to stratify their cancer doses in similar ways. Sites 1 and 2 dose data were higher than the American College of Radiology Dose Index Registry dose survey data. We thus propose including a cancer-specific subset for the dose registry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Moiz Ahmad
- Department of Imaging Physics and Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Xinming Liu
- Department of Imaging Physics and Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Myron A Pozniak
- From the Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin Madison School of Medicine and Public Health
| | - Meghan G Lubner
- From the Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin Madison School of Medicine and Public Health
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Imaging Physics and Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Ahmad M, Liu X, Morani AC, Ganeshan D, Anderson MR, Samei E, Jensen CT. Oncology-specific radiation dose and image noise reference levels in adult abdominal-pelvic CT. Clin Imaging 2023; 93:52-59. [PMID: 36375364 PMCID: PMC9712239 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2022.10.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2022] [Revised: 10/23/2022] [Accepted: 10/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To provide our oncology-specific adult abdominal-pelvic CT reference levels for image noise and radiation dose from a high-volume, oncologic, tertiary referral center. METHODS The portal venous phase abdomen-pelvis acquisition was assessed for image noise and radiation dose in 13,320 contrast-enhanced CT examinations. Patient size (effective diameter) and radiation dose (CTDIvol) were recorded using a commercial software system, and image noise (Global Noise metric) was quantified using a custom processing system. The reference level and range for dose and noise were calculated for the full dataset, and for examinations grouped by CT scanner model. Dose and noise reference levels were also calculated for exams grouped by five different patient size categories. RESULTS The noise reference level was 11.25 HU with a reference range of 10.25-12.25 HU. The dose reference level at a median effective diameter of 30.7 cm was 26.7 mGy with a reference range of 19.6-37.0 mGy. Dose increased with patient size; however, image noise remained approximately constant within the noise reference range. The doses were 2.1-2.5 times than the doses in the ACR DIR registry for corresponding patient sizes. The image noise was 0.63-0.75 times the previously published reference level in abdominal-pelvic CT examinations. CONCLUSIONS Our oncology-specific abdominal-pelvic CT dose reference levels are higher than in the ACR dose index registry and our oncology-specific image noise reference levels are lower than previously proposed image noise reference levels. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE This study reports reference image noise and radiation dose levels appropriate for the indication of abdomen-pelvis CT examination for cancer diagnosis and staging. The difference in these reference levels from non-oncology-specific CT examinations highlight a need for indication-specific, dose index and image quality reference registries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Moiz Ahmad
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States of America.
| | - Xinming Liu
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States of America.
| | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States of America.
| | - Dhakshinamoorthy Ganeshan
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States of America.
| | - Marcus R Anderson
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States of America.
| | - Ehsan Samei
- Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States of America.
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Wang MX, Dillman JR, Guccione J, Habiba A, Maher M, Kamel S, Panse PM, Jensen CT, Elsayes KM. Neurofibromatosis from Head to Toe: What the Radiologist Needs to Know. Radiographics 2022; 42:1123-1144. [PMID: 35749292 DOI: 10.1148/rg.210235] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) are autosomal dominant inherited neurocutaneous disorders or phakomatoses secondary to mutations in the NF1 and NF2 tumor suppressor genes, respectively. Although they share a common name, NF1 and NF2 are distinct disorders with a wide range of multisystem manifestations that include benign and malignant tumors. Imaging plays an essential role in diagnosis, surveillance, and management of individuals with NF1 and NF2. Therefore, it is crucial for radiologists to be familiar with the imaging features of NF1 and NF2 to allow prompt diagnosis and appropriate management. Key manifestations of NF1 include café-au-lait macules, axillary or inguinal freckling, neurofibromas or plexiform neurofibromas, optic pathway gliomas, Lisch nodules, and osseous lesions such as sphenoid dysplasia, all of which are considered diagnostic features of NF1. Other manifestations include focal areas of signal intensity in the brain, low-grade gliomas, interstitial lung disease, various abdominopelvic neoplasms, scoliosis, and vascular dysplasia. The various NF1-associated abdominopelvic neoplasms can be categorized by their cellular origin: neurogenic neoplasms, interstitial cells of Cajal neoplasms, neuroendocrine neoplasms, and embryonal neoplasms. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors and intracranial tumors are the leading contributors to mortality in NF1. Classic manifestations of NF2 include schwannomas, meningiomas, and ependymomas. However, NF2 may have shared cutaneous manifestations with NF1. Lifelong multidisciplinary management is critical for patients with either disease. The authors highlight the genetics and molecular pathogenesis, clinical and pathologic features, imaging manifestations, and multidisciplinary management and surveillance of NF1 and NF2. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ©RSNA, 2022.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mindy X Wang
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| | - Jonathan R Dillman
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| | - Jeffrey Guccione
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| | - Ahmed Habiba
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| | - Marwa Maher
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| | - Serageldin Kamel
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| | - Prasad M Panse
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| | - Corey T Jensen
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| | - Khaled M Elsayes
- From the Department of Radiology (M.X.W., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma (S.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030-4009; Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (J.G.); Department of Radiology (A.H.) and Faculty of Medicine (M.M.), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix/Scottsdale, Ariz (P.M.P.)
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Jensen CT. Image Quality Evaluation in Dual Energy CT of the Chest, Abdomen and Pelvis in Obese Patients with Deep Learning Image Reconstruction. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2022; 46:612-613. [PMID: 35759780 DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000001353] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Corey T Jensen
- From the Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Jensen CT, Gupta S, Saleh MM, Liu X, Wong VK, Salem U, Qiao W, Samei E, Wagner-Bartak NA. Reduced-Dose Deep Learning Reconstruction for Abdominal CT of Liver Metastases. Radiology 2022; 303:90-98. [PMID: 35014900 PMCID: PMC8962777 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.211838] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2021] [Revised: 10/19/2021] [Accepted: 10/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Background Assessment of liver lesions is constrained as CT radiation doses are lowered; evidence suggests deep learning reconstructions mitigate such effects. Purpose To evaluate liver metastases and image quality between reduced-dose deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR) and standard-dose filtered back projection (FBP) contrast-enhanced abdominal CT. Materials and Methods In this prospective Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study (September 2019 through April 2021), participants with biopsy-proven colorectal cancer and liver metastases at baseline CT underwent standard-dose and reduced-dose portal venous abdominal CT in the same breath hold. Three radiologists detected and characterized lesions at standard-dose FBP and reduced-dose DLIR, reported confidence, and scored image quality. Contrast-to-noise ratios for liver metastases were recorded. Summary statistics were reported, and a generalized linear mixed model was used. Results Fifty-one participants (mean age ± standard deviation, 57 years ± 13; 31 men) were evaluated. The mean volume CT dose index was 65.1% lower with reduced-dose CT (12.2 mGy) than with standard-dose CT (34.9 mGy). A total of 161 lesions (127 metastases, 34 benign lesions) with a mean size of 0.7 cm ± 0.3 were identified. Subjective image quality of reduced-dose DLIR was superior to that of standard-dose FBP (P < .001). The mean contrast-to-noise ratio for liver metastases of reduced-dose DLIR (3.9 ± 1.7) was higher than that of standard-dose FBP (3.5 ± 1.4) (P < .001). Differences in detection were identified only for lesions 0.5 cm or smaller: 63 of 65 lesions detected with standard-dose FBP (96.9%; 95% CI: 89.3, 99.6) and 47 lesions with reduced-dose DLIR (72.3%; 95% CI: 59.8, 82.7). Lesion accuracy with standard-dose FBP and reduced-dose DLIR was 80.1% (95% CI: 73.1, 86.0; 129 of 161 lesions) and 67.1% (95% CI: 59.3, 74.3; 108 of 161 lesions), respectively (P = .01). Lower lesion confidence was reported with a reduced dose (P < .001). Conclusion Deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR) improved CT image quality at 65% radiation dose reduction while preserving detection of liver lesions larger than 0.5 cm. Reduced-dose DLIR demonstrated overall inferior characterization of liver lesions and reader confidence. Clinical trial registration no. NCT03151564 © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corey T. Jensen
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| | - Shiva Gupta
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| | - Mohammed M. Saleh
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| | - Xinming Liu
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| | - Vincenzo K. Wong
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| | - Usama Salem
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| | - Wei Qiao
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| | - Ehsan Samei
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| | - Nicolaus A. Wagner-Bartak
- From the Departments of Abdominal Imaging (C.T.J., S.G., M.M.S.,
V.K.W., U.S., N.A.W.B.), Physics (X.L.), and Biostatistics (W.Q.), the
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473,
Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Center for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin
Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Medical Physics
Graduate Program, Departments of Radiology, Physics, Biomedical Engineering, and
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
(E.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Elsaiey A, Mahmoud HS, Jensen CT, Klimkowski S, Taher A, Chaudhry H, Morani AC, Wong VK, Salem UI, Palmquist SM, Elsayes KM. Mastocytosis-A Review of Disease Spectrum with Imaging Correlation. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13205102. [PMID: 34680251 PMCID: PMC8533777 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13205102] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2021] [Revised: 10/08/2021] [Accepted: 10/10/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary In this review will discuss the clinical presentation, pathophysiology, and role of imaging in detection and extent estimation of the systemic involvement of the disease, in addition to demonstration of appearance on varying imaging modalities. Familiarity with the potential imaging findings associated with mastocytosis can aid in early disease diagnosis and classification and accordingly can lead directing further work up and better management. Abstract Mastocytosis is a rare disorder due to the abnormal proliferation of clonal mast cells. Mast cells exist in most tissues, mature in situ from hematopoietic stem cells and develop unique characteristics of local effector cells. Mastocytosis develops by activation mutation of the KIT surface receptor which is involved in the proliferation of a number of cell lines such as mast cells, germ cells, melanocytes, and hematopoietic cells. It manifests as two main categories: cutaneous mastocytosis and systemic mastocytosis. Imaging can play an important role in detection and characterization of the disease manifestation, not only by radiography and bone scans, but also magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography, which can be more sensitive in the assessment of distinctive disease patterns. Radiologists should be aware of various appearances of this disease to better facilitate diagnosis and patient management. Accordingly, this review will discuss the clinical presentation, pathophysiology, and role of imaging in detection and extent estimation of the systemic involvement of the disease, in addition to demonstration of appearance on varying imaging modalities. Familiarity with the potential imaging findings associated with mastocytosis can aid in early disease diagnosis and classification and accordingly can lead directing further work up and better management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hagar S. Mahmoud
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Yale New Haven Health at 1939 Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT 06610, USA;
| | - Corey T. Jensen
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (C.T.J.); (S.K.); (A.C.M.); (V.K.W.); (U.I.S.); (S.M.P.)
| | - Sergio Klimkowski
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (C.T.J.); (S.K.); (A.C.M.); (V.K.W.); (U.I.S.); (S.M.P.)
| | - Ahmed Taher
- Transitional Year Residency Program, Trinity Health Midatlantic, Nazareth Hospital, Philadelphia, PA 19152, USA;
| | - Humaira Chaudhry
- Department of Radiology, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA;
| | - Ajaykumar C. Morani
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (C.T.J.); (S.K.); (A.C.M.); (V.K.W.); (U.I.S.); (S.M.P.)
| | - Vincenzo K. Wong
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (C.T.J.); (S.K.); (A.C.M.); (V.K.W.); (U.I.S.); (S.M.P.)
| | - Usama I. Salem
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (C.T.J.); (S.K.); (A.C.M.); (V.K.W.); (U.I.S.); (S.M.P.)
| | - Sarah M. Palmquist
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (C.T.J.); (S.K.); (A.C.M.); (V.K.W.); (U.I.S.); (S.M.P.)
| | - Khaled M. Elsayes
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (C.T.J.); (S.K.); (A.C.M.); (V.K.W.); (U.I.S.); (S.M.P.)
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Mohammadinejad P, Mileto A, Yu L, Leng S, Guimaraes LS, Missert AD, Jensen CT, Gong H, McCollough CH, Fletcher JG. CT Noise-Reduction Methods for Lower-Dose Scanning: Strengths and Weaknesses of Iterative Reconstruction Algorithms and New Techniques. Radiographics 2021; 41:1493-1508. [PMID: 34469209 DOI: 10.1148/rg.2021200196] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms are the most widely used CT noise-reduction method to improve image quality and have greatly facilitated radiation dose reduction within the radiology community. Various IR methods have different strengths and limitations. Because IR algorithms are typically nonlinear, they can modify spatial resolution and image noise texture in different regions of the CT image; hence traditional image-quality metrics are not appropriate to assess the ability of IR to preserve diagnostic accuracy, especially for low-contrast diagnostic tasks. In this review, the authors highlight emerging IR algorithms and CT noise-reduction techniques and summarize how these techniques can be evaluated to help determine the appropriate radiation dose levels for different diagnostic tasks in CT. In addition to advanced IR techniques, we describe novel CT noise-reduction methods based on convolutional neural networks (CNNs). CNN-based noise-reduction techniques may offer the ability to reduce image noise while maintaining high levels of image detail but may have unique drawbacks. Other novel CT noise-reduction methods are being developed to leverage spatial and/or spectral redundancy in multiphase or multienergy CT. Radiologists and medical physicists should be familiar with these different alternatives to adapt available CT technology for different diagnostic tasks. The scope of this article is (a) to review the clinical applications of IR algorithms as well as their strengths, weaknesses, and methods of assessment and (b) to explore new CT image reconstruction and noise-reduction techniques that promise to facilitate radiation dose reduction. ©RSNA, 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Payam Mohammadinejad
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Achille Mileto
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Lifeng Yu
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Shuai Leng
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Luis S Guimaraes
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Andrew D Missert
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Corey T Jensen
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Hao Gong
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Cynthia H McCollough
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| | - Joel G Fletcher
- From the Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (P.M., L.Y., S.L., A.D.M., H.G., C.H.M., J.G.F.); Department of Radiology, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Wash (A.M.); Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada (L.S.G.); and Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.T.J.)
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Grable C, Yusuf S, Song J, Viola GM, Ulhaq O, Banchs J, Jensen CT, Goel H, Hassan S. Characteristics of infective endocarditis in a cancer population. Open Heart 2021; 8:openhrt-2021-001664. [PMID: 34344722 PMCID: PMC8336187 DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2021-001664] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2021] [Accepted: 07/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Infective endocarditis (IE) is more common in patients with cancer as compared with the general population. Due to an immunocompromised state, the need for invasive procedures, hypercoagulability and the presence of indwelling catheters, patients with cancer are particularly predisposed to the development of IE. Objectives Limited information exists about IE in patients with cancer. We aimed to evaluate the characteristics of patients with cancer and IE at our tertiary care centre, including a comparison of the microorganisms implicated and their association with mortality. Methods A retrospective chart review of patients with cancer who had echocardiography for suspicion of endocarditis was conducted. A total of 56 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of cancer and endocarditis, based on the modified Duke criteria, were included in the study. Baseline demographics, risk factors for developing IE, echocardiography findings, microbiology and mortality data were analysed. Results Following the findings of vegetations by echocardiography, the median survival time was 8.5 months. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common organism identified as causing endocarditis. The mitral and aortic valves were the most commonly involved sites of endocarditis. Patients with S. aureus endocarditis (SAE) had a significantly poorer survival when compared with patients without SAE (p=0.0217) over the 12-month period from diagnosis of endocarditis. Conclusions Overall survival of patients with cancer and endocarditis is poor, with a worse outcome in patients with SAE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cullen Grable
- Department of Cardiology, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Syed Yusuf
- Department of Cardiology, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Juhee Song
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - George M Viola
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Infection Control and Employee Health, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Owais Ulhaq
- Department of Cardiology, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Jose Banchs
- Department of Cardiology, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Harsh Goel
- Department of Cardiology, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Saamir Hassan
- Department of Cardiology, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Baiomy A, Jensen CT, Ward JF, Chasen BA, Ravizzini GC. Incidental 18F-Fluciclovine Uptake in a Desmoid Tumor Detected in a Patient Undergoing PET/CT Imaging for Prostate Cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2021; 46:355-357. [PMID: 33323736 DOI: 10.1097/rlu.0000000000003459] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
ABSTRACT A 74-year-old man with biochemical recurrent prostate cancer underwent 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT for restaging to determine subsequent treatment strategy. 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT imaging demonstrated incidental focal heterogeneous increased 18F-fluciclovine uptake corresponding to a soft tissue nodule within the musculature of the left anterior abdominal wall. Subsequent ultrasound-guided biopsy of the lesion revealed histopathology compatible with a desmoid tumor. Consequently, the patient underwent surgical resection with wide local excision of the lesion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Beth A Chasen
- Nuclear Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Gregory C Ravizzini
- Nuclear Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Abstract
Simple Summary Bladder cancer is a complex disease, the sixth most common cancer, and one of the most expensive cancers to treat. In the last few decades, there has been a significant decrease in the bladder cancer-related mortality rate, potentially related to decreased smoking prevalence, improvements in diagnosing bladder cancer, and advances in treatment. Those advances in diagnostic tools and therapies and greater understanding of the disease are helping to evolve how bladder cancer is managed. The purpose of this article is to provide a review of bladder cancer pathology, diagnosis, staging, radiologic imaging, and management, and highlight recent developments and research. Abstract Methods: Keyword searches of Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library for manuscripts published in English, and searches of references cited in selected articles to identify additional relevant papers. Abstracts sponsored by various societies including the American Urological Association (AUA), European Association of Urology (EAU), and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) were also searched. Background: Bladder cancer is the sixth most common cancer in the United States, and one of the most expensive in terms of cancer care. The overwhelming majority are urothelial carcinomas, more often non-muscle invasive rather than muscle-invasive. Bladder cancer is usually diagnosed after work up for hematuria. While the workup for gross hematuria remains CT urography and cystoscopy, the workup for microscopic hematuria was recently updated in 2020 by the American Urologic Association with a more risk-based approach. Bladder cancer is confirmed and staged by transurethral resection of bladder tumor. One of the main goals in staging is determining the presence or absence of muscle invasion by tumor which has wide implications in regards to management and prognosis. CT urography is the main imaging technique in the workup of bladder cancer. There is growing interest in advanced imaging techniques such as multiparametric MRI for local staging, as well as standardized imaging and reporting system with the recently created Vesicle Imaging Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS). Therapies for bladder cancer are rapidly evolving with immune checkpoint inhibitors, particularly programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors, as well as another class of immunotherapy called an antibody-drug conjugate which consists of a cytotoxic drug conjugated to monoclonal antibodies against a specific target. Conclusion: Bladder cancer is a complex disease, and its management is evolving. Advances in therapy, understanding of the disease, and advanced imaging have ushered in a period of rapid change in the care of bladder cancer patients.
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
Hepatic steatosis can lead to liver cancer, cirrhosis, and portal hypertension. There are two main types, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and alcoholic liver disease. The detection and quantification of hepatic steatosis with lifestyle changes can slow the evolution from NAFLD to steatohepatitis. Currently, the gold standard for the quantification of fat in the liver is biopsy, has some limitations. Hepatic steatosis is frequently detected during cross sectional imaging. Ultrasound (US), Computed Tomography (CT), and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) provide noninvasive assessment of liver parenchyma and can detect fat infiltration in the liver. However, the non-invasive quantification of hepatic steatosis by imaging has been challenging. Recent MRI techniques show great promise in the detection and quantification of liver fat. The aim of this article is to review the utilization of non-invasive imaging modalities for the detection and quantification of hepatic steatosis, to evaluate their advantages and limitations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mayur Virarkar
- Department of Neuroradiology, The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, TX.
| | - Janio Szklaruk
- Department of Abdominal Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Abdominal Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Melissa W Taggart
- Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Priya Bhosale
- Department of Abdominal Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Jensen CT, Khetan R, Adkins J, Javadi S, Liu X, Sun J, Hassan SA, Morani AC. Delayed bolus-tracking trigger at CT correlates with cardiac dysfunction and suboptimal portovenous contrast phase. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2021; 46:826-835. [PMID: 32700213 PMCID: PMC7855139 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02655-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2020] [Revised: 06/29/2020] [Accepted: 07/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess whether delayed trigger during bolus-tracking for CT correlates with reduced heart function and suboptimal portovenous contrast phase. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients who underwent portovenous abdominal CT using bolus-tracking and echocardiography within 2 weeks were included and excluded if there was a non-standard contrast injection. The bolus trigger time (BTT) at 100 Hounsfield units in the abdominal aorta, patient age, congestive heart failure (CHF) history, and ejection fraction were recorded. Two radiologists scored the liver contrast phase (1-5, 5 being an optimal portovenous phase). When applicable, the BTT and contrast score of the most recent comparison examination with equivalent technical parameters were also recorded. Simple linear regression (univariate) was used to test for associations with trigger time. RESULTS 114 patients with a mean age of 61 ± 15 years fulfilled criteria. The mean trigger time was 18 ± 6 s (range: 6-38 s) and the mean ejection fraction was 52 ± 12% (range: 19-69%). A longer bolus trigger had a significant correlation with reduced ejection fraction (P = 0.0018), lower hepatic contrast score (P < 0.0001), history of CHF (P = 0.0212), and older age (P = 0.0223). Contrast score differences between the study exam and available prior exams revealed score differences of 0 (n = 73), 1 (n = 15) and 2 (n = 5); these were associated, respectively, with a mean bolus trigger time difference between exams of 2 s (range, 0-6 s), 6 s (range, 1-15 s), and 11 s (range, 5-13). The P-value comparing bolus trigger time and contrast score differences was less than 0.0001. A lower ejection fraction also significantly correlated with suboptimal PV contrast phase (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION Delayed time to trigger during bolus-tracking for CT can indicate cardiac dysfunction and may not adequately adjust to provide an optimal portovenous contrast phase.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corey T Jensen
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA.
| | - Rahul Khetan
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Jake Adkins
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Sanaz Javadi
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Xinming Liu
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Jia Sun
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Saamir A Hassan
- Department of Cardiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Tawfik A, Thomas AJ, Menias CO, Nada A, Shaaban AM, Gaballah AH, Morani AC, Jensen CT, Elsayes KM. Trans-diaphragmatic Pathologies: Anatomical Background and Spread of Disease on Cross-sectional Imaging. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2020; 50:252-261. [PMID: 32624297 DOI: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2020.05.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2020] [Revised: 05/10/2020] [Accepted: 05/26/2020] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
The diaphragm is not only a sheet of muscle separating the abdominal and thoracic cavities: it plays an essential role in ventilation and can act as a gateway for the spread of different disease processes between the abdominal and the thoracic cavity. Careful attention to the appearance of the diaphragm on various imaging modalities is essential to ensure the accurate diagnosis of diaphragmatic disorders, which may be secondary to functional or anatomical derangements.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aya Tawfik
- Department of Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Aaron J Thomas
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | - Ayman Nada
- Department of Radiology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO
| | - Akram M Shaaban
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | | | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Department of Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Khaled M Elsayes
- Department of Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Cheng Y, Smith TB, Jensen CT, Liu X, Samei E. Correlation of Algorithmic and Visual Assessment of Lesion Detection in Clinical Images. Acad Radiol 2020; 27:847-855. [PMID: 31447259 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2019.07.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2019] [Revised: 07/11/2019] [Accepted: 07/16/2019] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES Clinically-relevant quantitative measures of task-based image quality play key roles in effective optimization of medical imaging systems. Conventional phantom-based measures do not adequately reflect the real-world image quality of clinical Computed Tomography (CT) series which is most relevant for diagnostic decision-making. The assessment of detectability index which incorporates measurements of essential image quality metrics on patient CT images can overcome this limitation. Our current investigation extends and validates the technique on standard-of-care clinical cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS We obtained a clinical CT image dataset from an Institutional Review Board-approved prospective study on colorectal adenocarcinoma patients for detecting hepatic metastasis. For this study, both perceptual image quality and lesion detection performance of same-patient CT image series with standard and low dose acquisitions in the same breath hold and four processing algorithms applied to each acquisition were assessed and ranked by expert radiologists. The clinical CT image dataset was processed using the previously validated method to estimate a detectability index for each known lesion size in the size distribution of hepatic lesions relevant for the imaging task and for each slice of a CT series. We then combined these lesion-size-specific and slice-specific detectability indexes with the size distribution of hepatic lesions relevant for the imaging task to compute an effective detectability index for a clinical CT imaging condition of a patient. The assessed effective detectability indexes were used to rank task-based image quality of different imaging conditions on the same patient for all patients. We compared the assessments to those by expert radiologists in the prospective study in terms of rank order agreement between the rankings of algorithmic and visual assessment of lesion detection and perceptual quality. RESULTS Our investigation indicated that algorithmic assessment of lesion detection and perceptual quality can predict observer assessment for detecting hepatic metastasis. The algorithmic and visual assessment of lesion detection and perceptual quality are strongly correlated using both the Kendall's Tau and Spearman's Rho methods (perfect agreement has value 1): for assessment of lesion detection, 95% of the patients have rank correlation coefficients values exceeding 0.87 and 0.94, respectively, and for assessment of perceptual quality, 0.85 and 0.94, respectively. CONCLUSION This study used algorithmic detectability index to assess task-based image equality for detecting hepatic lesions and validated it against observer rankings on standard-of-care clinical CT cases. Our study indicates that detectability index provides a robust reflection of overall image quality for detecting hepatic lesions under clinical CT imaging conditions. This demonstrates the concept of utilizing the measure to quantitatively assess the quality of the information content that different imaging conditions can provide for the same clinical imaging task, which enables targeted optimization of clinical CT systems to minimize clinical and patient risks.
Collapse
|
21
|
Javadi S, Elsherif S, Bhosale P, Jensen CT, Layman RR, Jacobsen MC, Le O, Jia S, Parikh RJ, Tamm EP. Quantitative attenuation accuracy of virtual non-enhanced imaging compared to that of true non-enhanced imaging on dual-source dual-energy CT. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45:1100-1109. [PMID: 32052130 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02415-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the quantitative attenuation and reliability of virtual non-contrast (VNC) images of the abdomen acquired from multiphasic scans with a dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) system and compare it with that of true non-enhanced images (TNC) on second- (Flash) and third- (Force) generation DECT scanners. METHODS This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board and included 123 patients with pancreatic cancer who had undergone routine clinical multiphasic DECT examinations at our institution using Flash and Force scanners between March and August 2017. VNC images of the abdomen were reconstructed from late arterial phase images. For every patient, regions-of-interest were defined in the aorta, fluid-containing structures (gallbladder, pleural effusion, and renal cysts > 10 mm), paravertebral muscles, subcutaneous fat, spleen, pancreas, renal cortex, and liver (eight locations) on TNC and VNC images. The mean attenuation of VNC was compared with TNC by organ for each CT scanner using an equivalence test and the Bland-Altman plot. The mean attenuations for TNC or VNC were compared between the Force and Flash CT scanners using a two-sample t test. RESULTS The VNC attenuation of organs on the Force scanner was lower than was that on the Flash, and the mean attenuation difference in different organs on the Force was closer to 0. The estimated means of TNC and VNC were equivalent for an equivalence margin of 10 on the Force scanner. CONCLUSION VNC images in DECT are a promising alternative to TNC images. In clinical scenarios in which non-enhanced CT images are required but are not available for accurate diagnosis, VNC images can potentially serve as an alternative to TNC images without the radiation exposure risks.
Collapse
|
22
|
Glober G, Gunther J, Fang P, Milgrom S, Korivi BR, Jensen CT, Wagner-Bartak NA, Ahmed S, Lee HJ, Nair R, Steiner R, Parmar S, Iyer S, Westin J, Fayad L, Rodriguez MA, Neelapu S, Nastoupil L, Flowers CR, Dabaja BS, Pinnix CC. Imaging Surveillance of Limited-stage Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients After PET-CT-documented First Remission. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2020; 20:533-541. [PMID: 32291233 PMCID: PMC10071957 DOI: 10.1016/j.clml.2020.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2019] [Revised: 02/03/2020] [Accepted: 02/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Early stage Hodgkin lymphoma (ESHL) is highly curable; however, 10% to 15% of patients experience relapse. We examined the utilization of follow-up imaging for patients with ESHL who achieved a metabolic complete response after upfront therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS The records of adult patients treated at a single institution between 2003 and 2014 were reviewed. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) and CT scan frequency was quantified during the 2 years following treatment and subsequent visits beyond 2 years. RESULTS The study cohort contained 179 patients. The median age was 31 years; bulky disease was present in 30%. ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) or AVD (doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) was given in 97%; 75% received radiation therapy. At a median follow-up of 6.9 years, the 5-year progression-free and overall survival rates were 93.7% and 98.1%, respectively. Relapse occurred in 5% (n = 9) of patients at a median of 9.1 months (range, 4.6-27.2 months) from therapy. Two patients presented with symptoms prompting imaging in follow-up. Within 2 years after therapy, 376 PET-CT scans and 3325 CT scans were performed, yielding an average of 2.1 PET-CTs and 18.6 CTs per patient. Of the initial 179 patients, 113 had follow-up conducted beyond 2 years post-therapy; an average of 2.7 PET-CTs and 33.2 CTs were performed. In the 2-year post-therapy period, 463 scans were performed per relapse detected. CONCLUSION In this cohort of patients with ESHL who responded completely to frontline therapy, the relapse rate was low. Routine imaging surveillance lacks clinical benefit in this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gordon Glober
- University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, FL
| | - Jillian Gunther
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Penny Fang
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Sarah Milgrom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado, Denver, CO
| | - Brinda Rao Korivi
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Sairah Ahmed
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Hun Ju Lee
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Ranjit Nair
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Raphael Steiner
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Simrit Parmar
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Swaminathan Iyer
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Jason Westin
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Luis Fayad
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - M Alma Rodriguez
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Sattva Neelapu
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Loretta Nastoupil
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Bouthaina S Dabaja
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Chelsea C Pinnix
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Abstract
The spectrum of ovarian tumors in the pediatric population differs significantly from that in adults. Germ cell tumors are the predominant class of ovarian tumors in children, whereas epithelial tumors are the most common in adults. Ultrasonography is the modality of choice for the initial evaluation of pediatric ovarian tumors. Determining the diagnosis based on imaging may prove difficult, and combining the imaging findings with the clinical scenario is very helpful in reaching a differential diagnosis during clinical practice. We will discuss the spectrum of ovarian neoplasms in the pediatric population and describe their clinical, pathologic, and imaging characteristics. A few unique entities related to ovarian tumors, such as growing teratoma syndrome, anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis, and hereditary ovarian tumor syndromes, are also discussed. In addition, we will review several entities that may mimic ovarian neoplasms as well as their distinct imaging features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdelrahman K Hanafy
- Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas Health Science Centre at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, 78229, USA
| | - Bilal Mujtaba
- Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holocombe Blvd, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Sireesha Yedururi
- Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holocombe Blvd, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holocombe Blvd, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Ramon Sanchez
- Radiology, Children's National Health System, 111 Michigan Avenue NW, Washington, DC, 20010, USA
| | - Mary T Austin
- Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holocombe Blvd, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holocombe Blvd, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Morani AC, Taher A, Ramani NS, Jensen CT, Patel A, Mujtaba B. Pancreatic Cancer Imaging: What the Surgeon Wants to Know? Journal of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology 2020. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3401645] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022] Open
Abstract
AbstractPancreatic cancer is rare but is one of the deadliest cancers. Complete surgical removal of the cancer with negative margins is the only potentially curative treatment. However, majority of the cases present with distant metastases and/or locally advanced disease, and only a limited subset (up to 20%) of patients are surgical candidates. Therefore, accurate staging of pancreatic cancer is very important for treatment planning. It is very important to distinguish between patients who are surgical candidates and those who would need palliative treatment. Imaging plays a crucial role in the detection of the primary tumor, vascular involvement and variants, metastasis, prediction of resectability, and monitoring treatment response. High-resolution multidetector computed tomography (CT) is the primary imaging modality of choice for diagnosing and staging pancreatic cancers. Nevertheless, integration of ultrasound, CT, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be needed for accurate determination of the tumor extent and optimal management. Herein, we aim to provide a radiological review for “what the surgeon wants to know about pancreatic cancer?” In this review, we highlight the main types of invasive pancreatic cancers and discuss the role of imaging in determining the resectability of pancreatic tumors and the role of neoadjuvant treatment in downstaging borderline or unresectable cases in addition to featuring significant postsurgical complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ajaykumar C. Morani
- Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States
| | - Ahmed Taher
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States
| | - Nisha S. Ramani
- Department of Anatomic Pathology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States
| | - Corey T. Jensen
- Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States
| | - Asif Patel
- Department of MBA, IGlobal University, Vienna, Virginia, United States
| | - Bilal Mujtaba
- Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Einstein SA, Rong XJ, Jensen CT, Liu X. Quantification and homogenization of image noise between two CT scanner models. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2019; 21:174-178. [PMID: 31859454 PMCID: PMC6964752 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2019] [Revised: 11/18/2019] [Accepted: 11/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Feedback from radiologists indicated that differences in image appearance and noise impeded reading of post‐contrast computed tomography (CT) scans from an updated CT scanner that was recently added to a fleet of existing scanners from the same vendor, despite using identically named reconstruction algorithms. The goals of this work were to quantify and possibly standardize image quality on the new and an existing scanner using phantom images. Three months of daily quality control images were analyzed to determine the mean CT number and noise magnitude in a water phantom. Next, subtraction images from the uniformity section of an American College of Radiology CT phantom were used to generate noise power spectra for both scanners. Then, a semi‐anthropomorphic liver phantom was imaged with both scanners in triplicate using identical body protocols to quantify differences CT number and noise magnitude. Finally, the scanner dependence of CT number and noise magnitude on material attenuation was quantified using a multi‐energy CT phantom with 15 material inserts. Significant differences between scanners were determined using a paired or Welch's t test as appropriate. In daily quality control images, the new scanner exhibited slightly higher CT number (0.697 vs. 0.412, P < 0.001, n = 85) and slightly lower noise magnitude (4.85 vs. 4.94, P < 0.001, n = 85). Measured NPS was not significantly different between the existing and new scanners. Interestingly, it was observed that the noise magnitude from the new scanner increased with increasing material attenuation in both the liver (P = 0.008) and multi‐energy (P < 0.001) phantoms. Using an alternate reconstruction algorithm with the new scanner eliminated this deviation at high material attenuations. While standard noise evaluation in a water phantom was unable to discern differences between the scanners, more comprehensive testing with higher attenuation materials allowed for the characterization and homogenization of image quality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel A Einstein
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Xiujiang John Rong
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Xinming Liu
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Korivi BR, Faria S, Aly A, Sun J, Patnana M, Jensen CT, Wagner-Bartak N, Bhosale PR. Intestinal and diffuse gastric cancer: a retrospective study comparing primary sites. Clin Imaging 2019; 56:33-40. [PMID: 30870726 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2018] [Revised: 02/12/2019] [Accepted: 03/01/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We assessed differences in primary sites and spread patterns of the intestinal and diffuse subtypes of gastric carcinoma. We also compared survival outcomes based on spread patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS For this retrospective IRB-approved study, our institutional imaging database was mined for patients with gastric cancer. We included 99 treatment-naïve patients. Patient demographics, pathologic data, tumor classification, primary tumor site, and metastasis sites were recorded. Pearson's chi-squared test was used to correlate tumor pathology with metastatic sites. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared between baseline metastatic types. A heat map was created based on the relative frequencies of metastatic sites for each primary tumor site. RESULTS Of the 99 patients, 66 patients had intestinal and 33 had diffuse gastric carcinoma. The intestinal subtype was significantly associated with hepatic metastases (p < 0.001). Diffuse subtype was associated with peritoneal metastases, including omental metastases (p < 0.006), gastrosplenic ligament involvement (p < 0.004), and mesocolonic implants (p < 0.008). Patients with primary gastric tumors occurring at the greater curvature had longer overall survival than those with primary sites at the antrum, GE junction and lesser curvature (p = 0.0015). Patients with peritoneal metastases had a significantly shorter overall survival than patients without peritoneal metastases (p < 0.001). Patients without mesocolon, gastrohepatic ligament, and gastrosplenic ligament involvement had a better survival (p = 0.005, p = 0.0002, and p = 0.0005, respectively). Presence of hepatic metastases had no effect on survival (p = 0.16). CONCLUSION Recognizing distinctive spread patterns for intestinal versus diffuse gastric carcinoma can aid radiologists in diagnosis and guide clinical management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brinda Rao Korivi
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, United States of America.
| | - Silvana Faria
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, United States of America.
| | - Asran Aly
- National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Egypt
| | - Jia Sun
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1411, Houston, TX 77030, United States of America.
| | - Madhavi Patnana
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, United States of America.
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, United States of America.
| | - Nicolaus Wagner-Bartak
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, United States of America.
| | - Priya R Bhosale
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Jensen CT, Wagner-Bartak NA, Vu LN, Liu X, Raval B, Martinez D, Wei W, Cheng Y, Samei E, Gupta S. Detection of Colorectal Hepatic Metastases Is Superior at Standard Radiation Dose CT versus Reduced Dose CT. Radiology 2018; 290:400-409. [PMID: 30480489 PMCID: PMC6357984 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2018181657] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate colorectal cancer hepatic metastasis detection and characterization between reduced radiation dose (RD) and standard dose (SD) contrast material-enhanced CT of the abdomen and to qualitatively compare between filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative reconstruction algorithms. Materials and Methods In this prospective study (from May 2017 through November 2017), 52 adults with biopsy-proven colorectal cancer and suspected hepatic metastases at baseline CT underwent two portal venous phase CT scans: SD and RD in the same breath hold. Three radiologists, blinded to examination details, performed detection and characterization of 2-15-mm lesions on the SD FBP and RD adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR)-V 60% series images. Readers assessed overall image quality and lesions between SD FBP and seven different iterative reconstructions. Two nonblinded consensus reviewers established the reference standard using the picture archiving and communication system lesion marks of each reader, multiple comparison examinations, and clinical data. Results RD CT resulted in a mean dose reduction of 54% compared with SD. Of the 260 lesions (233 metastatic, 27 benign), 212 (82%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 76%, 86%) were detected with RD CT, whereas 252 (97%; 95% CI: 94%, 99%) were detected with SD (P < .001); per-lesion sensitivity was 79% (95% CI: 74%, 84%) and 94% (95% CI: 90%, 96%) (P < .001), respectively. Mean qualitative scores ranked SD images as higher quality than RD series images, and ASIR-V ranked higher than ASIR and Veo 3.0. Conclusion CT evaluation of colorectal liver metastases is compromised with modest radiation dose reduction, and the use of iterative reconstructions could not maintain observer performance. © RSNA, 2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corey T Jensen
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - Nicolaus A Wagner-Bartak
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - Lan N Vu
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - Xinming Liu
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - Bharat Raval
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - David Martinez
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - Wei Wei
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - Yuan Cheng
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - Ehsan Samei
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| | - Shiva Gupta
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (C.T.J., N.A.W., L.N.V., B.R., D.M., S.G.), Biostatistics (W.W.), and Physics (X.L.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009; and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Y.C., E.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Javadi S, Menias CO, Karbasian N, Shaaban A, Shah K, Osman A, Jensen CT, Lubner MG, Gaballah AH, Elsayes KM. HIV-related Malignancies and Mimics: Imaging Findings and Management. Radiographics 2018; 38:2051-2068. [PMID: 30339518 DOI: 10.1148/rg.2018180149] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
The risk of developing malignancy is higher in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection than in non-HIV-infected patients. Several factors including immunosuppression, viral coinfection, and high-risk lifestyle choices lead to higher rates of cancer in the HIV-infected population. A subset of HIV-related malignancies are considered to be acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-defining malignancies, as their presence confirms the diagnosis of AIDS in an HIV-infected patient. The introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has led to a significant drop in the rate of AIDS-defining malignancies, including Kaposi sarcoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and invasive cervical carcinoma. However, non-AIDS-defining malignancies (eg, Hodgkin lymphoma, lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and head and neck cancers) now account for an increasing number of cancer cases diagnosed in HIV-infected patients. Although the number has decreased, AIDS-defining malignancies account for 15%-19% of all deaths in HIV-infected patients in the post-HAART era. Most HIV-related malignancies in HIV-infected patients manifest at an earlier age with a more aggressive course than that of non-HIV-related malignancies. Understanding common HIV-related malignancies and their specific imaging features is crucial for making an accurate and early diagnosis, which impacts management. Owing to the weakened immune system of HIV-infected patients, other entities such as various infections, particularly opportunistic infections, are prevalent in these patients. These processes can have confounding clinical and imaging manifestations that mimic malignancy. This article reviews the most common AIDS-defining and non-AIDS-defining malignancies, the role of imaging in their diagnosis, and the imaging mimics of malignancies in HIV-infected patients. ©RSNA, 2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sanaz Javadi
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Christine O Menias
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Niloofar Karbasian
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Akram Shaaban
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Komal Shah
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Adam Osman
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Corey T Jensen
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Meghan G Lubner
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Ayman H Gaballah
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| | - Khaled M Elsayes
- From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (S.J., K.S., A.O., C.T.J., K.M.E.) and Interventional Radiology (N.K.), University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Ariz (C.O.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (A.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wis (M.G.L.); and Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Mo (A.H.G.)
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Abstract
Various pathologies can affect the adrenal gland. Noninvasive cross-sectional imaging is used for evaluating adrenal masses. Accurate diagnosis of adrenal lesions is critical, especially in cancer patients; the presence of adrenal metastasis changes prognosis and treatment. Characterization of adrenal lesions predominantly relies on morphologic and physiologic features to enable correct diagnosis and management. Key diagnostic features to differentiate benign and malignant adrenal lesions include presence/absence of intracytoplasmic lipid, fat cells, hemorrhage, calcification, or necrosis and locoregional and distant disease; enhancement pattern and washout values; and lesion size and stability. This article reviews a spectrum of adrenal pathologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Khaled M Elsayes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| | - Sally Emad-Eldin
- Department of Diagnostic and Intervention Radiology, Cairo University, Kasr Al-Ainy Street, Cairo 11652, Egypt
| | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Jensen CT, Chahin A, Amin VD, Khalaf AM, Elsayes KM, Wagner-Bartak N, Zhao B, Zhou S, Bedi DG. Qualitative Slow Blood Flow in Lower Extremity Deep Veins on Doppler Sonography: Quantitative Assessment and Preliminary Evaluation of Correlation With Subsequent Deep Venous Thrombosis Development in a Tertiary Care Oncology Center. J Ultrasound Med 2017; 36:1867-1874. [PMID: 28470976 PMCID: PMC5568938 DOI: 10.1002/jum.14220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2016] [Accepted: 11/28/2016] [Indexed: 05/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine whether the qualitative sonographic appearance of slow deep venous flow in the lower extremities correlates with quantitative slow flow and an increased risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in oncology patients. METHODS In this Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective study, we reviewed lower extremity venous Doppler sonographic examinations of 975 consecutive patients: 482 with slow flow and 493 with normal flow. The subjective slow venous flow and absence of initial DVT were confirmed by 2 radiologists. Peak velocities were recorded at 3 levels. Each patient was followed for DVT development. The associations between DVT and the presence of slow venous flow were examined by the Fisher exact test; a 2-sample t test was used for peak velocity and DVT group comparisons. The optimal cutoff peak velocity for correlation with the radiologists' perceived slow flow was determined by the Youden index. RESULTS Deep venous thrombosis development in the slow-flow group (21 of 482 [4.36%]) was almost doubled compared with patients who had normal flow (11 of 493 [2.23%]; P = .0456). Measured peak venous velocities were lower in the slow-venous flow group (P < .001). Patients with subsequent DVT did not have a significant difference in venous velocities compared with their respective patient groups. The sum of 3 venous level velocities resulted in the best cutoff for dichotomizing groups into normal versus slow venous flow. CONCLUSIONS Qualitative slow venous flow in the lower extremities on Doppler sonography accurately correlates with quantitatively slower flow, and this preliminary evaluation suggests an associated mildly increased rate of subsequent DVT development in oncology patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corey T. Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009
| | - Antoun Chahin
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009
| | - Veral D. Amin
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - Ahmed M. Khalaf
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009
| | - Khaled M. Elsayes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009
| | - Nicolaus Wagner-Bartak
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009
| | - Bo Zhao
- Department of Internal Medicine (Nephrology), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - Shouhao Zhou
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009
| | - Deepak G. Bedi
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030-4009
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Telesmanich ME, Jensen CT, Enriquez JL, Wagner-Bartak NA, Liu X, Le O, Wei W, Chandler AG, Tamm EP. Third version of vendor-specific model-based iterativereconstruction (Veo 3.0): evaluation of CT image quality in the abdomen using new noise reduction presets and varied slice optimization. Br J Radiol 2017; 90:20170188. [PMID: 28707531 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To qualitatively and quantitatively compare abdominal CT images reconstructed with a newversion of model-based iterative reconstruction (Veo 3.0; GE Healthcare Waukesha, WI) utilizing varied presetsof resolution preference, noise reduction and slice optimization. METHODS This retrospective study was approved by our Institutional Review Board and was Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant. The raw datafrom 30 consecutive patients who had undergone CT abdomen scanning were used to reconstructfour clinical presets of 3.75mm axial images using Veo 3.0: 5% resolution preference (RP05n), 5%noise reduction (NR05) and 40% noise reduction (NR40) with new 3.75mm "sliceoptimization," as well as one set using RP05 with conventional 0.625mm "slice optimization" (RP05c). The images were reviewed by two independent readers in a blinded, randomized manner using a 5-point Likert scale as well as a 5-point comparative scale. Multiple two-dimensional circular regions of interest were defined for noise and contrast-to-noise ratio measurements. Line profiles were drawn across the 7 lp cm-1 bar pattern of the Catphan 600 phantom for evaluation of spatial resolution. RESULTS The NR05 image set was ranked as the best series in overall image quality (mean difference inrank 0.48, 95% CI [0.081-0.88], p = 0.01) and with specific reference to liver evaluation (meandifference 0.46, 95% CI [0.030-0.89], p = 0.03), when compared with the secondbest series ineach category. RP05n was ranked as the best for bone evaluation. NR40 was ranked assignificantly inferior across all assessed categories. Although the NR05 and RP05c image setshad nearly the same contrast-to-noise ratio and spatial resolution, NR05 was generally preferred. Image noise and spatial resolution increased along a spectrum with RP05n the highest and NR40the lowest. Compared to RP05n, the average noise was 21.01% lower for NR05, 26.88%lower for RP05c and 50.86% lower for NR40. CONCLUSION Veo 3.0 clinical presets allow for selection of image noise and spatial resolution balance; for contrast-enhanced CT evaluation of the abdomen, the 5% noise reduction preset with 3.75 mm slice optimization (NR05) was generally ranked superior qualitatively and, relative to other series, was in the middle of the spectrum with reference to image noise and spatial resolution. Advances in knowledge: To our knowledge, this is the first study of Veo 3.0 noise reduction presets and varied slice optimization. This study provides insight into the behaviour of slice optimization and documents the degree of noise reduction and spatial resolution changes that users can expect across various Veo 3.0 clinical presets. These results provide important parameters to guide preset selection for both clinical and research purposes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan E Telesmanich
- 1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine , Houston , USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston , USA
| | - Jose L Enriquez
- 1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine , Houston , USA
| | - Nicolaus A Wagner-Bartak
- 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston , USA
| | - Xinming Liu
- 3 Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston , USA
| | - Ott Le
- 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston , USA
| | - Wei Wei
- 4 Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston , USA
| | - Adam G Chandler
- 3 Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston , USA.,5 Department of Molecular Imaging and Computed Tomography Research, GE Healthcare , Waukesha , USA
| | - Eric P Tamm
- 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston , USA
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Michelle M A, Jensen CT, Habra MA, Menias CO, Shaaban AM, Wagner-Bartak NA, Roman-Colon AM, Elsayes KM. Adrenal cortical hyperplasia: diagnostic workup, subtypes, imaging features and mimics. Br J Radiol 2017; 90:20170330. [PMID: 28707538 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170330] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Adrenal cortical hyperplasia manifests radiologically as a non-malignant growth, or enlargement, of the adrenal glands, specifically the cortex, although the cortex cannot be definitively identified by conventional imaging. Controlled by the pituitary gland, the adrenal cortex drives critical processes, such as the production of cortisol, mineralocorticoid and sex hormones. Any disruption in the multiple enzymes and hormones involved in these pathways may cause serious or life-threatening symptoms, often associated with anatomical changes in the adrenal glands. Diagnosis and treatment of adrenal cortical hyperplasia requires a thorough clinical evaluation. As imaging has become more robust so has its role in the diagnosis and treatment of adrenal conditions. CT has been the primary modality for adrenal imaging owing to reproducibility, temporal and spatial resolution and broad access. MRI serves a complimentary role in adrenal imaging and can be used to further evaluate indeterminate CT findings or serve as an adjunct tool without the use of ionizing radiation. Ultrasound and fluoroscopy (genitography) are most commonly used in children and foetuses to evaluate congenital adrenal hyperplasia. This article will discuss the clinical presentation, laboratory workup and imaging features of adrenal cortical hyperplasia, both congenital and acquired.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Agrons Michelle M
- 1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mouhammed Amir Habra
- 3 Department of Endocrine Neoplasia and Hormonal Disorders, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Akram M Shaaban
- 5 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | | | - Alicia M Roman-Colon
- 1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.,6 Department of Radiology, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Khaled M Elsayes
- 1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Gaballah AH, Jensen CT, Palmquist S, Pickhardt PJ, Duran A, Broering G, Elsayes KM. Angiosarcoma: clinical and imaging features from head to toe. Br J Radiol 2017; 90:20170039. [PMID: 28471264 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 117] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Angiosarcoma is a rare, aggressive subtype of soft-tissue sarcoma with a propensity for local recurrence and metastasis associated with a generally poor prognosis, unless diagnosed early. Given the vascular endothelial cell origin of angiosarcoma, tumours may develop in essentially any organ; however, there is a predilection for the skin where half of all tumours arise, increasing in prevalence with age. The most common risk factors are chronic lymphoedema and history of radiation. We review the most important radiological findings along the spectrum of angiosarcoma from head to toe throughout the body, including uncommon and rare locations. Key imaging features of angiosarcoma across multiple organ systems will be described, as well as the impact on management and prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ayman H Gaballah
- 1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sarah Palmquist
- 3 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Perry J Pickhardt
- 4 Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Alper Duran
- 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Gregory Broering
- 3 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Khaled M Elsayes
- 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
ElGuindy YM, Javadi S, Menias CO, Jensen CT, Elsamaloty H, Elsayes KM. Imaging of secretory tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42:1113-1131. [PMID: 27878636 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-016-0976-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
Gastrointestinal secretory tumors, or gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, encompass a wide array of endocrine cell tumors. The significance of these tumors lies in their ability to alter physiology through hormone production as we well as in their malignant potential. Functioning tumors may present earlier due to symptomatology; conversely, non-functioning tumors are often diagnosed late as they reach large sizes, causing symptoms secondary to local mass effect. Imaging aids in the diagnosis, staging, and prognosis and provides key information for presurgical planning. Although most of these tumors are sporadic, some are associated with important syndromes and associations, knowledge of which is critical for patient management. In this article, we provide an overview of secretory and neuroendocrine tumors of the GI tract and pancreas.
Collapse
|
35
|
Abstract
Various pathologies can affect the adrenal gland. Noninvasive cross-sectional imaging is used for evaluating adrenal masses. Accurate diagnosis of adrenal lesions is critical, especially in cancer patients; the presence of adrenal metastasis changes prognosis and treatment. Characterization of adrenal lesions predominantly relies on morphologic and physiologic features to enable correct diagnosis and management. Key diagnostic features to differentiate benign and malignant adrenal lesions include presence/absence of intracytoplasmic lipid, fat cells, hemorrhage, calcification, or necrosis and locoregional and distant disease; enhancement pattern and washout values; and lesion size and stability. This article reviews a spectrum of adrenal pathologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Khaled M Elsayes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| | - Sally Emad-Eldin
- Department of Diagnostic and Intervention Radiology, Cairo University, Kasr Al-Ainy Street, Cairo 11652, Egypt
| | - Ajaykumar C Morani
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Li G, Liu X, Dodge CT, Jensen CT, Rong XJ. A noise power spectrum study of a new model-based iterative reconstruction system: Veo 3.0. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2016; 17:428-439. [PMID: 27685118 PMCID: PMC5874127 DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v17i5.6225] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2015] [Revised: 05/25/2016] [Accepted: 05/13/2016] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate performance of the third generation of model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) system, Veo 3.0, based on noise power spectrum (NPS) analysis with various clinical presets over a wide range of clinically applicable dose levels. A CatPhan 600 surrounded by an oval, fat-equivalent ring to mimic patient size/shape was scanned 10 times at each of six dose levels on a GE HD 750 scanner. NPS analysis was performed on images reconstructed with various Veo 3.0 preset combinations for comparisons of those images reconstructed using Veo 2.0, filtered back projection (FBP) and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruc-tion (ASiR). The new Target Thickness setting resulted in higher noise in thicker axial images. The new Texture Enhancement function achieved a more isotropic noise behavior with less image artifacts. Veo 3.0 provides additional reconstruction options designed to allow the user choice of balance between spatial resolution and image noise, relative to Veo 2.0. Veo 3.0 provides more user selectable options and in general improved isotropic noise behavior in comparison to Veo 2.0. The overall noise reduction performance of both versions of MBIR was improved in comparison to FBP and ASiR, especially at low-dose levels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guang Li
- The University of Texas MD Cancer Center.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Jensen CT, Vicens-Rodriguez RA, Wagner-Bartak NA, Fox PS, Faria SC, Carrion I, Qayyum A, Tamm EP. Multidetector CT detection of peritoneal metastases: evaluation of sensitivity between standard 2.5 mm axial imaging and maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) reconstructions. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2016; 40:2167-72. [PMID: 25666971 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-015-0370-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Our purpose was to evaluate the sensitivity of multidetector CT for the detection of peritoneal metastases between standard 2.5 mm axial imaging and maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) reconstructions. MATERIALS AND METHODS The Institutional Review Board approved this retrospective study and waived the need to obtain patient consent. We retrospectively identified 36 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and peritoneal metastatic disease who underwent a pancreatic protocol CT examination of the abdomen and pelvis between January 2012 and January 2014. Three independent radiologists reviewed a randomized combination of standard axial (2.5 mm reconstructed thickness, 2.5 mm interval) and axial MIP reconstructions (6, 3 mm interval) over two sessions. Each reader recorded metastasis location in PACS. Subsequent consensus review by two radiologists determined the final number and size of metastases. RESULTS The reviewers found 328 peritoneal implants in 36 patients. After accounting for the size, location, and number of lesions as well as multiple readers, a generalized estimating equations model showed that the statistical combination of MIP with standard technique significantly increased the odds of correctly identifying a lesion (OR 2.16; 95% CI 1.86-2.51; p value < 0.0001) compared to standard technique alone. MIP reconstruction as a standalone technique was less sensitive compared to standard technique alone (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.65-0.99; p value = 0.0468). When compared to standard axial imaging, evaluation via MIP reconstructions resulted in the identification of an additional 50 (15%), 45 (14%), and 55 (17%) lesions by Readers 1-3, respectively. CONCLUSION The axial 6 mm MIP series is complimentary in the CT evaluation of peritoneal metastases. MIP reconstruction evaluation identified a significant number of additional lesions, but is not adequate as a standalone technique for peritoneal cavity assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corey T Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA.
| | - Rafael A Vicens-Rodriguez
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Nicolaus A Wagner-Bartak
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Patricia S Fox
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Silvana C Faria
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Ivan Carrion
- University Hospital Joan XXIII (Tarragona), Avda. Jaume Balmes, XX, X-X, Vilanova i la Geltru Barcelona, 08800, Spain
| | - Aliya Qayyum
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| | - Eric P Tamm
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens Academic Tower, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1473, Houston, TX, 77030-4009, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Dodge CT, Tamm EP, Cody DD, Liu X, Jensen CT, Wei W, Kundra V, Rong XJ. Performance evaluation of iterative reconstruction algorithms for achieving CT radiation dose reduction - a phantom study. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2016; 17:511-531. [PMID: 27074454 PMCID: PMC5875046 DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v17i2.5709] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2015] [Revised: 11/19/2015] [Accepted: 11/16/2015] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to characterize image quality and dose performance with GE CT iterative reconstruction techniques, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR), and model‐based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), over a range of typical to low‐dose intervals using the Catphan 600 and the anthropomorphic Kyoto Kagaku abdomen phantoms. The scope of the project was to quantitatively describe the advantages and limitations of these approaches. The Catphan 600 phantom, supplemented with a fat‐equivalent oval ring, was scanned using a GE Discovery HD750 scanner at 120 kVp, 0.8 s rotation time, and pitch factors of 0.516, 0.984, and 1.375. The mA was selected for each pitch factor to achieve CTDIvol values of 24, 18, 12, 6, 3, 2, and 1 mGy. Images were reconstructed at 2.5 mm thickness with filtered back‐projection (FBP); 20%, 40%, and 70% ASiR; and MBIR. The potential for dose reduction and low‐contrast detectability were evaluated from noise and contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) measurements in the CTP 404 module of the Catphan. Hounsfield units (HUs) of several materials were evaluated from the cylinder inserts in the CTP 404 module, and the modulation transfer function (MTF) was calculated from the air insert. The results were confirmed in the anthropomorphic Kyoto Kagaku abdomen phantom at 6, 3, 2, and 1 mGy. MBIR reduced noise levels five‐fold and increased CNR by a factor of five compared to FBP below 6 mGy CTDIvol, resulting in a substantial improvement in image quality. Compared to ASiR and FBP, HU in images reconstructed with MBIR were consistently lower, and this discrepancy was reversed by higher pitch factors in some materials. MBIR improved the conspicuity of the high‐contrast spatial resolution bar pattern, and MTF quantification confirmed the superior spatial resolution performance of MBIR versus FBP and ASiR at higher dose levels. While ASiR and FBP were relatively insensitive to changes in dose and pitch, the spatial resolution for MBIR improved with increasing dose and pitch. Unlike FBP, MBIR and ASiR may have the potential for patient imaging at around 1 mGy CTDIvol. The improved low‐contrast detectability observed with MBIR, especially at low‐dose levels, indicate the potential for considerable dose reduction. PACS number(s): 87.57.Q‐, 87.57,nf, 87.57.C‐, 87.57.cj, 87.57.cf, 87.57.cm, 87.57.uq
Collapse
|
39
|
Bui PL, Vicens RA, Westin JR, Jensen CT. Multimodality imaging of Epstein-Barr virus-associated inflammatory pseudotumor-like follicular dendritic cell tumor of the spleen: case report and literature review. Clin Imaging 2015; 39:525-8. [PMID: 25725946 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2014.12.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2014] [Revised: 12/05/2014] [Accepted: 12/24/2014] [Indexed: 01/27/2023]
Abstract
Inflammatory pseudotumors (IPTs) are rare tumors of unknown etiology; however, there is a strong association with the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV). EBV-positive IPTs are typically found in the liver and spleen. While many EBV-positive splenic IPTs contain follicular dendritic cell (FDC) proliferations, they are not aggressive such as with conventional FDC tumors. EBV-positive splenic IPTs have been reported with low malignant potential. We present a case with multimodality imaging of an EBV-positive IPT-like tumor with FDC features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pauline L Bui
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, Houston, TX 77030.
| | - Rafael A Vicens
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Unit 1473, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Houston, TX 77030-4009.
| | - Jason R Westin
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, Unit 0429, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Houston, TX 77030-4009
| | - Corey T Jensen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Unit 1473, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Houston, TX 77030-4009.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Kaur H, Choi H, You YN, Rauch GM, Jensen CT, Hou P, Chang GJ, Skibber JM, Ernst RD. MR imaging for preoperative evaluation of primary rectal cancer: practical considerations. Radiographics 2012; 32:389-409. [PMID: 22411939 DOI: 10.1148/rg.322115122] [Citation(s) in RCA: 133] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
High-resolution magnetic resonance (MR) imaging plays a pivotal role in the pretreatment assessment of primary rectal cancer. The success of this technique depends on obtaining good-quality high-resolution T2-weighted images of the primary tumor; the mesorectal fascia, peritoneal reflection, and other pelvic viscera; and superior rectal and pelvic sidewall lymph nodes. Although orthogonal axial high-resolution T2-weighted MR images are the cornerstone for the staging of primary rectal cancer, high-resolution sagittal and coronal images provide additional value, particularly in tumors that arise in a redundant tortuous rectum. Coronal high-resolution T2-weighted MR images also improve the assessment of nodal morphology, particularly for superior rectal and pelvic sidewall nodes, and of the relationship between advanced-stage tumors and adjacent pelvic structures. Rectal gel should be used in MR imaging examinations conducted for the staging of polypoid tumors, previously treated lesions, and small rectal tumors. However, it should not be used in examinations performed to stage large or low rectal tumors. Diffusion-weighted imaging is useful for identifying nodes and, occasionally, the primary tumor when the tumor is difficult to visualize with other sequences. Three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging provides multiplanar capability with a superior signal-to-noise ratio compared with two-dimensional T2-weighted imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harmeet Kaur
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Unit 1473, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Biering-Sørensen F, Bendix T, Hørbov S, Jensen CT. [What do we know about occupational movement disorders of the extremities?]. Ugeskr Laeger 1983; 145:1071-3. [PMID: 6868158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
|
42
|
Nielsen SL, Larsen B, Prahl M, Jensen CT, Jensen BE, Wenkens V. [Hospital training compared with home training in patients with intermittent claudication]. Ugeskr Laeger 1977; 139:2733-6. [PMID: 595156] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
|
43
|
Gjorup S, Gyntelberg F, Jensen CT, Jensen K, Mejer J, Morck H, Rasmussen OV, Rose C, Schroll M. [Wine substitutes]. Ugeskr Laeger 1976; 138:3383. [PMID: 1006836] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|