Characterization of tumors of jaw: Additive value of contrast enhancement and dual-energy computed tomography

BACKGROUND Currently, the differentiation of jaw tumors is mainly based on the lesion’s morphology rather than the enhancement characteristics, which are important in the differentiation of neoplasms across the body. There is a paucity of literature on the enhancement characteristics of jaw tumors. This is mainly because, even though computed tomography (CT) is used to evaluate these lesions, they are often imaged without intravenous contrast. This study hypothesised that the enhancement characteristics of the solid component of jaw tumors can aid in the differentiation of these lesions in addition to their morphology by dual-energy CT, therefore improving the ability to differentiate between various pathologies. AIM To evaluate the role of contrast enhancement and dual-energy quantitative parameters in CT in the differentiation of jaw tumors METHODS Fifty-seven patients with jaw tumors underwent contrast-enhanced dual-energy CT. Morphological analysis of the tumor, including the enhancing solid component, was done, followed by quantitative analysis of iodine concentration (IC), water concentration (WC), HU, and normalized IC. The study population was divided into four subgroups based on histopathological analysis-central giant cell granuloma (CGCG), ameloblastoma, odontogenic keratocyst (OKC), and other jaw tumors. A one-way ANOVA test for parametric variables and the Kruskal-Wallis test for non-parametric variables were used. If significant differences were found, a series of independent t -tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used. RESULTS Ameloblastoma was the most common pathology (n = 20), followed by CGCG (n = 11) and OKC. CGCG showed a higher mean concentration of all quantitative parameters than ameloblastomas (P < 0.05). An IC threshold of 31.35 × 100 μg/cm3 had the maximum sensitivity (81.8%) and specificity (65%). Between ameloblastomas and OKC, the former showed a higher mean concentration of all quantitative parameters (P < 0.001), however when comparing unilocular ameloblastomas with OKCs, the latter showed significantly higher WC. Also, ameloblastoma had a higher IC and lower WC compared to “other jaw tumors” group. CONCLUSION Enhancement characteristics of solid components combined with dual-energy parameters offer a more precise way to differentiate between jaw tumors.