Accuracy of Contrast Enhanced CT Portal Venous Phase Alone Compared with Multiphase for Follow Up Liver Metastases of Various Primary Malignancies
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the accuracy of portovenous phase-computed tomography (CT) scanning compared with the conventional multiphase scanning in post-treatment imaging of metastatic liver lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records and imaging of patients with metastatic liver disease were obtained by searching an ICD-10 coding. Imaging was first retrospectively reviewed only in portovenous phase (PVP). After a 7 days interval, imaging was reviewed again in all phases [Multiphase; non-contrasted (NECT), portovenous phase (PVP), hepatic arterial phase (HAP) and delayed phase (DP)]. Imaging of each patient was interpreted by consensus of two advanced diagnostic body imaging radiologists. All data were recorded and analyzed by the researcher.
RESULTS: A total of 274 patients were diagnosed with secondary malignant neoplasm of the liver and intrahepatic bile duct by ICD-10 coding during the study period. After reviewing the medical records, 127 patients were excluded. Among the 147 patients included, the lesions were further categorized as isolated-lesion group (80 patients, 245 lesions) and overall-lesion group (67 patients). Most patients had colorectal primary site (84 patients, 57.14%). For the isolated-lesion group, PVP showed the highest performance to detect metastatic lesion and the highest conspicuity (90.2%, 221 lesions) followed by HAP (26.5%, 65 lesions). Similar findings were noted in the overall-lesion group, PVP had the highest detection rate of 85.1% (57 patients) followed by HAP (10 patients, 14.9%) while NECT and DP showed no superiority over the other phases in lesion detection. About one-third of breast cancer patients had better visualized lesions in HAP than PVP.
CONCLUSION: In most malignancies, PVP was the best phase of CT scan both in terms of detection rate and conspicuity, particularly in colorectal primary. However, HAP should be added in some specific kinds of malignancies to increase the lesion detection rate, especially in breast cancer (about one-third of patients). NECT and DP had no superiority over other phases in term of lesion detection rate in follow-up CT scan of metastatic liver disease. However, there were some limitations in this study due to a small number of patients of some primary sites.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Ackerman NB, Lien WM, Kondi ES, et al. The blood supply of experimental liver metastases. I. distribution of hepatic artery and portal vein blood to “small” and “large” tumors. Surgery 1969;66:1067-72.
Imam K, Bluemke DA. MR imaging in the evaluation of hepatic metastases. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2000;8(4):741-56.
Baker ME, Pelley R. Hepatic metastases: basic principles and implications for radiologists. Radiology 1995;197:329-37. doi: 10.1148/radiology.197.2.7480672.
Soyer P, Poccard M, Boudiaf M, et al. Detection of hypovascular hepatic metastases at triple-phase helical CT: sensitivity of phases and comparison with surgical and histopathologic findings. Radiology. 2004;231(2):413-20. doi: 10.1148/ra- diol.2312021639.
Sica GT, Ji H, Ros PR. CT and MR imaging of hepatic metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:691-8. doi: 10.2214/ajr.174.3.1740691.
Levin DC, Rao VM, Parker L. The recent downturn in utilization of CT: the start of a new trend? J Am Coll Radiol 2012; 9(11):795-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2012.05.023.
Van Der Molen AJ, Schilham A, Stoop P, et al. A national survey on radiation dose in CT in the Netherlands. Insights Imaging 2013;4:383-90. doi: 10.1007/s13244-013-0253-9.
Sagara Y, Hara AK, Pavlicek W, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection in 53 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195(3):713-9. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.2989.
Honda Y, Higaki T, Higashihori H, et al. Re-evaluation of detectability of liver metastases by contrast-enhanced CT: added value of hepatic arterial phase imaging. Jpn J Radiol. 2014;32(8):467-75. doi: 10.1007/s11604-014-0331-z.
Lincke T, Zech CJ. Liver metastases: Detection and staging. Eur J Radiol. 2017;97:76-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.10.016.
Sheafor DH, Frederick MG, Paulson EK, et al. Comparison of unenhanced, hepatic arterial-dominant, and portal venous-dominant phase helical CT for the detection of liver metastases in women with breast carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172(4):961-8. doi: 10.2214/ ajr.172.4.10587129.
Zappa M, Hentic O, Vullierme MP, et al. Is visual radiological of liver tumor burden in patients with neuroendocrine tumors reproducible? Endocr Connect. 2017;6(1):33-38. doi: 10.1530/EC-16-0092.
Nakai H, Arisono S, Isoda H, et al. Imaging characteristics of liver metastases overlooked at contrast-enhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019;212(4):782-7. doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.20526.
Choi SH, Kim SY, Park SH, et al. Diagnostic performance of CT, gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI, and PET/CT for the diagnosis of colorectal liver metastasis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;47(5):1237-50. doi: 10.1002/jmri.25852.
Namasivayam S, Martin DR, Saini S. Imaging of liver metastases: MRI. Cancer Imaging. 2007;7(1):2-9. doi: 10.1102/1470-7330.2007.0002.