[单源双束与双源双能CT肝脏真假非对比图像的比较]。

Jeong Sub Lee, Guk Myung Choi, Bong Soo Kim, Su Yeon Ko, Kyung Ryeol Lee, Jeong Jae Kim, Doo Ri Kim
{"title":"[单源双束与双源双能CT肝脏真假非对比图像的比较]。","authors":"Jeong Sub Lee,&nbsp;Guk Myung Choi,&nbsp;Bong Soo Kim,&nbsp;Su Yeon Ko,&nbsp;Kyung Ryeol Lee,&nbsp;Jeong Jae Kim,&nbsp;Doo Ri Kim","doi":"10.3348/jksr.2021.0193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the magnitude of differences between attenuation values of the true non-contrast image (TNC) and virtual non-contrast image (VNC) derived from twin-beam dual-energy CT (tbDECT) and dual-source DECT (dsDECT).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 62 patients who underwent liver dynamic DECT with tbDECT (<i>n</i> = 32) or dsDECT (<i>n</i> = 30). Arterial VNC (AVNC), portal VNC (PVNC), and delayed VNC (DVNC) were reconstructed using multiphasic DECT. Attenuation values of multiple intra-abdominal organs (<i>n</i> = 11) on TNCs were subsequently compared to those on multiphasic VNCs. Further, we investigated the percentage of cases with an absolute difference between TNC and VNC of ≤ 10 Hounsfield units (HU).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For the mean attenuation values of TNC and VNC, 33 items for each DECT were compared according to the multiphasic VNCs and organs. More than half of the comparison items for each DECT showed significant differences (tbDECT 17/33; dsDECT 19/33; Bonferroni correction <i>p</i> < 0.0167). The percentage of cases with an absolute difference ≤ 10 HU was 56.7%, 69.2%, and 78.6% in AVNC, PVNC, and DVNC in tbDECT, respectively, and 70.5%, 78%, and 78% in dsDECT, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>VNCs derived from the two DECTs were insufficient to replace TNCs because of the considerable difference in attenuation values.</p>","PeriodicalId":17455,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology","volume":"84 1","pages":"170-184"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a4/58/jksr-84-170.PMC9935954.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Comparison of True and Virtual Non-Contrast Images of Liver Obtained with Single-Source Twin Beam and Dual-Source Dual-Energy CT].\",\"authors\":\"Jeong Sub Lee,&nbsp;Guk Myung Choi,&nbsp;Bong Soo Kim,&nbsp;Su Yeon Ko,&nbsp;Kyung Ryeol Lee,&nbsp;Jeong Jae Kim,&nbsp;Doo Ri Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.3348/jksr.2021.0193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the magnitude of differences between attenuation values of the true non-contrast image (TNC) and virtual non-contrast image (VNC) derived from twin-beam dual-energy CT (tbDECT) and dual-source DECT (dsDECT).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 62 patients who underwent liver dynamic DECT with tbDECT (<i>n</i> = 32) or dsDECT (<i>n</i> = 30). Arterial VNC (AVNC), portal VNC (PVNC), and delayed VNC (DVNC) were reconstructed using multiphasic DECT. Attenuation values of multiple intra-abdominal organs (<i>n</i> = 11) on TNCs were subsequently compared to those on multiphasic VNCs. Further, we investigated the percentage of cases with an absolute difference between TNC and VNC of ≤ 10 Hounsfield units (HU).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For the mean attenuation values of TNC and VNC, 33 items for each DECT were compared according to the multiphasic VNCs and organs. More than half of the comparison items for each DECT showed significant differences (tbDECT 17/33; dsDECT 19/33; Bonferroni correction <i>p</i> < 0.0167). The percentage of cases with an absolute difference ≤ 10 HU was 56.7%, 69.2%, and 78.6% in AVNC, PVNC, and DVNC in tbDECT, respectively, and 70.5%, 78%, and 78% in dsDECT, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>VNCs derived from the two DECTs were insufficient to replace TNCs because of the considerable difference in attenuation values.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology\",\"volume\":\"84 1\",\"pages\":\"170-184\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a4/58/jksr-84-170.PMC9935954.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3348/jksr.2021.0193\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3348/jksr.2021.0193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估双束双能CT (tbDECT)和双源DECT (dsDECT)获得的真无对比度图像(TNC)和虚拟无对比度图像(VNC)衰减值的差异幅度。材料和方法:本回顾性研究纳入62例肝动态DECT合并tbDECT (n = 32)或dsDECT (n = 30)的患者。应用多相DECT重建动脉型VNC (AVNC)、门静脉型VNC (PVNC)和延迟型VNC (DVNC)。随后将TNCs与多相vnc的多个腹腔内器官(n = 11)衰减值进行比较。此外,我们调查了TNC和VNC之间绝对差异≤10 Hounsfield单位(HU)的病例百分比。结果:各DECT按多期VNC和各脏器比较TNC和VNC的平均衰减值33项。每个DECT的比较项目有一半以上显示显著差异(tbDECT 17/33;dsDECT 19/33;Bonferroni修正p < 0.0167)。AVNC、PVNC和DVNC在tbDECT中绝对差异≤10 HU的比例分别为56.7%、69.2%和78.6%,在dsDECT中分别为70.5%、78%和78%。结论:由于衰减值差异较大,两种dect衍生的vnc不足以替代TNCs。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Comparison of True and Virtual Non-Contrast Images of Liver Obtained with Single-Source Twin Beam and Dual-Source Dual-Energy CT].

Purpose: To assess the magnitude of differences between attenuation values of the true non-contrast image (TNC) and virtual non-contrast image (VNC) derived from twin-beam dual-energy CT (tbDECT) and dual-source DECT (dsDECT).

Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 62 patients who underwent liver dynamic DECT with tbDECT (n = 32) or dsDECT (n = 30). Arterial VNC (AVNC), portal VNC (PVNC), and delayed VNC (DVNC) were reconstructed using multiphasic DECT. Attenuation values of multiple intra-abdominal organs (n = 11) on TNCs were subsequently compared to those on multiphasic VNCs. Further, we investigated the percentage of cases with an absolute difference between TNC and VNC of ≤ 10 Hounsfield units (HU).

Results: For the mean attenuation values of TNC and VNC, 33 items for each DECT were compared according to the multiphasic VNCs and organs. More than half of the comparison items for each DECT showed significant differences (tbDECT 17/33; dsDECT 19/33; Bonferroni correction p < 0.0167). The percentage of cases with an absolute difference ≤ 10 HU was 56.7%, 69.2%, and 78.6% in AVNC, PVNC, and DVNC in tbDECT, respectively, and 70.5%, 78%, and 78% in dsDECT, respectively.

Conclusion: VNCs derived from the two DECTs were insufficient to replace TNCs because of the considerable difference in attenuation values.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
98
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Comparison of the Efficacy of Diluted Polyethylene Glycol and Low-Density (0.1% w/v) Barium Sulfate Suspension for CT Enterography. [Clinical Role of Interventional Radiology in Abdominal Solid Organ Trauma]. Extremely Rare CT and MRI Findings of Peritoneal Leiomyoma Mimicking Hepatic Mass: A Case Report. Usefulness of Corticomedullary-Phase CT Urography in Patients with Suspected Acute Renal Colic Visiting the Emergency Department. [Statistical Mistakes Commonly Made When Writing Medical Articles].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1