Top

Published in:

01-08-2013 | Urogenital

Distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal masses with dual-source dual-energy CT: iodine quantification versus standard enhancement measurements

Authors: Giorgio Ascenti, Achille Mileto, Bernhard Krauss, Michele Gaeta, Alfredo Blandino, Emanuele Scribano, Nicola Settineri, Silvio Mazziotti

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 8/2013

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of iodine quantification and standard enhancement measurements in distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal masses.

Materials and methods

The Institutional Review Board approved this retrospective study conducted from data found in institutional patient databases and archives. Seventy-two renal masses were characterised as enhancing or nonenhancing using standard enhancement measurements (in HU) and iodine quantification (in mg/ml). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of standard enhancement measurements and iodine quantification were calculated from χ ² tests of contingency with histopathology or imaging follow-up as the reference standard. Difference in accuracy was assessed by means of McNemar analysis.

Results

Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and diagnostic accuracy for standard enhancement measurements and iodine quantification were 77.7 %, 100 %, 100 %, 81.8 %, 89 % and 100 %, 94.4 %, 94.7, 100 % and 97 %, respectively. The McNemar analysis showed that the accuracy of iodine quantification was significantly better (P < 0.001) than that of standard enhancement measurements.

Conclusion

Compared with standard enhancement measurements, whole-tumour iodine quantification is more accurate in distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal masses.

Key Points

• Enhancement of renal lesions is important when differentiating benign from malignant tumours.

• Dual-energy CT offers measurement of iodine uptake rather than mere enhancement values.

• Whole-tumour iodine quantification seems more accurate than standard CT enhancement measurements.

Siegel R, Ward E, Brawley O, Jemal A (2011) Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 61:212–236PubMedCrossRef

Tsui KH, Shvarts O, Smith RB et al (2000) Renal cell carcinoma: prognostic significance of incidentally detected tumors. J Urol 163:426–430PubMedCrossRef

Birnbaum BA, Jacobs JE, Ramchandani P (1996) Multiphasic renal CT: comparison of renal mass enhancement during the corticomedullary and nephrographic phases. Radiology 200:753–758PubMed

Israel GM, Bosniak MA (2005) How I do it: evaluating renal masses. Radiology 236:441–450PubMedCrossRef

Israel GM, Silverman SG (2011) The incidental renal mass. Radiol Clin North Am 49:369–383PubMedCrossRef

Graser A, Becker CR, Staehler M et al (2010) Single-phase dual-energy CT allows for characterization of renal masses as benign or malignant. Invest Radiol 45:399–405PubMed

Millet I, Curros Doyon F, Hoa D et al (2011) Characterization of small solid renal lesions: can benign and malignant tumors be differentiated with CT? AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:887–896PubMedCrossRef

Chandarana H, Megibow AJ, Cohen BA et al (2011) Iodine quantification with dual-energy CT: phantom study and preliminary experience with renal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:W693–W700PubMedCrossRef

Birnbaum BA, Maki DD, Chakraborty DP, Jacobs JE, Babb JS (2002) Renal cyst pseudoenhancement: evaluation with an anthropomorphic body CT phantom. Radiology 225:83–90PubMedCrossRef

10.

Birnbaum BA, Hindman N, Lee J, Babb JS (2007) Renal cyst pseudoenhancement: influence of multidetector CT reconstruction algorithm and scanner type in phantom model. Radiology 244:767–775PubMedCrossRef

11.

Birnbaum BA, Hindman N, Lee J et al (2007) Multidetector row CT attenuation measurements: assessment of intra- and interscanner variability with an anthropomorphic body CT phantom. Radiology 242:109–119PubMedCrossRef

12.

Fletcher JG, Takahashi N, Hartman R et al (2009) Dual-energy and dual-source CT: is there a role in the abdomen and pelvis? Radiol Clin North Am 47:41–57PubMedCrossRef

13.

Brown CL, Hartman RP, Dzyubak OP et al (2009) Dual-energy CT iodine overlay technique for characterization of renal masses as cyst or solid: a phantom feasibility study. Eur Radiol 19:1289–1295PubMedCrossRef

14.

Chae EJ, Song JW, Seo JB, Krauss B, Jang YM, Song KS (2008) Clinical utility of dual-energy CT in the evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules: initial experience. Radiology 249:671–681PubMedCrossRef

15.

Ascenti G, Mazziotti S, Mileto A et al (2012) Dual-source dual-energy CT evaluation of complex cystic renal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:1026–1034PubMedCrossRef

16.

Johnson TR, Krauss B, Sedlmair M et al (2007) Material differentiation by dual energy CT: initial experience. Eur Radiol 17:1510–1517PubMedCrossRef

17.

Petersilka M, Bruder H, Krauss B et al (2008) Technical principles of dual source CT. Eur J Radiol 68:362–368PubMedCrossRef

18.

Graser A, Johnson TR, Hecht EM et al (2009) Dual-Energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images? Radiology 252:433–440PubMedCrossRef

19.

Neville AM, Gupta RJ, Miller CM, Merkle EM, Paulson EK, Boll DT (2011) Detection of renal lesion enhancement with dual-energy multidetector CT. Radiology 259:173–183PubMedCrossRef

20.

Graser A, Johnson TR, Chandarana H, Macari M (2009) Dual energy CT: preliminary observations and potential clinical applications in the abdomen. Eur Radiol 19:13–23PubMedCrossRef

21.

Ascenti G, Mileto A, Gaeta M, Blandino A, Mazziotti S, Scribano E (2012) Single-phase dual-energy CT urography in the evaluation of haematuria. Clin Radiol. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1016/j.crad.2012.11.001

22.

Mileto A, Mazziotti S, Gaeta M et al (2012) Pancreatic dual-source dual-energy CT: is it time to discard unenhanced imaging? Clin Radiol 67:334–339PubMedCrossRef

23.

Ascenti G, Mazziotti S, Lamberto S et al (2011) Dual-energy CT for detection of endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair: usefulness of colored iodine overlay. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:1408–1414PubMedCrossRef

24.

Israel GM, Bosniak MA (2008) Pitfalls in renal mass evaluation and how to avoid them. Radiographics 28:1325–1338PubMedCrossRef

25.

Heneghan JP, Spielmann AL, Sheafor DH, Kliewer MA, De Long DM, Nelson RC (2002) Pseudoenhancement of simple renal cysts: a comparison of single and multidetector helical CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 26:90–94PubMedCrossRef

26.

Maki DD, Birnbaum BA, Chakraborty DP, Jacobs JE, Carvalho BM, Herman GT (1999) Renal cyst pseudoenhancement: beam-hardening effects on CT numbers. Radiology 213:468–472PubMed

27.

Abdulla C, Kalra MK, Saini S et al (2002) Pseudoenhancement of simulated renal cysts in a phantom using different multidetector CT scanners. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1473–1476PubMedCrossRef

28.

Bosniak MA, Rofsky NM (1996) Problems in the detection and characterization of small renal masses. Radiology 200:286–287PubMed

29.

Herts BR, Coll DM, Novick AC et al (2002) Enhancement characteristics of papillary renal neoplasms revealed on triphasic helical CT of the kidneys. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:367–372PubMedCrossRef

30.

Israel GM, Bosniak MA (2003) Follow-up CT of moderately complex cystic lesions of the kidney (Bosniak category IIF). AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:627–633PubMedCrossRef

31.

Kaza R, Caoili EM, Cohan RH, Platt JF (2011) Distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal lesions with fast kilovoltage-switching dual-energy CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:1375–1381PubMedCrossRef

32.

Jinzaki M, McTavish JD, Zou KH, Judy PF, Silverman SG (2004) Evaluation of small (≤ 3 cm) renal masses with MDCT: benefits of thin overlapping reconstructions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1223–1228CrossRef

Title: Distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal masses with dual-source dual-energy CT: iodine quantification versus standard enhancement measurements
Authors: Giorgio Ascenti
Achille Mileto
Bernhard Krauss
Michele Gaeta
Alfredo Blandino
Emanuele Scribano
Nicola Settineri
Silvio Mazziotti
Publication date: 01-08-2013
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 8/2013
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2811-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal masses with dual-source dual-energy CT: iodine quantification versus standard enhancement measurements

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2013

Mammographic features of calcifications in DCIS: correlation with oestrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status

Shear wave elastography of tumour growth in a human breast cancer model with pathological correlation

Letter to the Editor re: ESUR prostate MR guidelines

Computed tomography-guided interstitial high dose rate brachytherapy for centrally located liver tumours: a single institution study

Association between linear measurements of corpus callosum and gait in the elderly

Erratum to: Intra-individual randomised comparison of gadobutrol 1.0 M versus gadobenate dimeglumine 0.5 M in patients scheduled for preoperative breast MRI