Dual-layer spectral detector computed tomography parameters can improve diagnostic efficiency of lung adenocarcinoma grading

BackgroundIt is difficult to distinguish the pathological grade of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) with traditional computed tomography (CT). The aim of this study was to assess tumor differentiation by dual-layer spectral detector CT combined with morphological parameters. MethodsIn this prospective stu...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery 2022-09, Vol.12 (9), p.4601-4611
Hauptverfasser: Mu, Ronghua, Meng, Zhuoni, Guo, Zixuan, Qin, Xiaoyan, Huang, Guangyi, Yang, Xuri, Jin, Hui, Yang, Peng, Zhang, Xiaodi, Zhu, Xiqi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BackgroundIt is difficult to distinguish the pathological grade of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) with traditional computed tomography (CT). The aim of this study was to assess tumor differentiation by dual-layer spectral detector CT combined with morphological parameters. MethodsIn this prospective study, a total of 67 patients with pathologically diagnosed LUAD were enrolled: 39 patients in the well- and moderately-differentiated group (14 and 25 patients, respectively) and 28 patients in the poorly-differentiated group. Morphological parameters, non-enhanced CT number, double-enhanced CT number, effective atomic number, monoenergetic CT images (40 and 70 keV), iodine density, and thoracic aorta iodine density of tumors were measured. The slope of the spectral curve and normalized iodine density were calculated. The diagnostic efficiency of the spectral parameters alone, and the combined spectral and morphological parameters were obtained by statistical analysis. ResultsThe morphological signs of LUAD (the vessel convergence sign, bronchus encapsulated air sign, and liquefactive necrosis) were higher in the poorly-differentiated group than in the well-moderately-differentiated group (57.1% vs. 30.8%, 40.0%; 60.7% vs. 28.2%, 32.0%; 64.3% vs. 28.2%, 24.0%; all P
ISSN:2223-4292
2223-4306
DOI:10.21037/qims-22-2