Utilization of virtual low-keV monoenergetic images generated using dual-layer spectral detector computed tomography for the assessment of peritoneal seeding from ovarian cancer

This study aimed to compare the quality of virtual low-keV monoenergetic images vs conventional images reconstructed from dual-layer spectral detector computed tomography (SDCT) for the detection of peritoneal implants of ovarian cancer.Fifty ovarian cancer patients who underwent abdominopelvic SDCT...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medicine (Baltimore) 2020-06, Vol.99 (23), p.e20444-e20444
Hauptverfasser: Kim, Taek Min, Kim, Sang Youn, Cho, Jeong Yeon, Kim, Seung Hyup, Moon, Min Hoan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study aimed to compare the quality of virtual low-keV monoenergetic images vs conventional images reconstructed from dual-layer spectral detector computed tomography (SDCT) for the detection of peritoneal implants of ovarian cancer.Fifty ovarian cancer patients who underwent abdominopelvic SDCT scans were included in this retrospective study. Virtual monoenergetic images at 40 (VMI40) and 50 keV (VMI50), and two conventional images were reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative model reconstruction (IMR) protocols. The mean attenuation of the peritoneal implant, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio relative to ascites (CNRA) and adjacent reference tissues (e.g., bowel wall, hepatic, or splenic parenchyma [CNRB]) were calculated and compared using paired t tests. Qualitative image analysis regarding overall image quality, image noise, image blurring, lesion conspicuity, was performed by two radiologists. A subgroup analysis according to the peritoneal implant region was also conducted.VMI40 yielded significantly higher mean attenuation (183.35) of SNR and CNR values (SNR 11.69, CNRA 7.39, CNRB 2.68), compared to VMI50, IR, and FBP images (P 
ISSN:0025-7974
1536-5964
1536-5964
DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000020444