OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to compare dual-phase and single-phase helical CT for the detection and assessment of resectability of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. We studied 60 patients (31 men, 29 women; age range, 31-84 years; mean age, 62 years) with suspected pancreatic malignancy. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups. For group A (n = 30), unenhanced scans through the liver and pancreas were followed by two separate acquisitions (dual-phase) at 20-25 and at 60-80 sec after IV contrast administration. For group B (n = 30), unenhanced scans were followed by one set of scans (single-phase) acquired caudocranially (from the inferior hepatic margin to the diaphragm) starting 50 sec after IV contrast administration. Two observers independently scored images for the presence of tumor and for assessment of tumor resectability. RESULTS. Comparison of dual-phase versus single-phase helical CT for tumor detection showed a diagnostic accuracy for observer 1 of 87% and 90%, respectively, and for observer 2, of 90% and 87%, respectively. For both helical CT techniques, the overall agreement between the two observers was 83% (? = 0.73 ± 0.03) for single-phase helical CT and 90% (? = 0.89 ± 0.03) for dual-phase helical CT. The assessment of resectability was affected by the low number of resectable tumors (n = 8). CONCLUSION. Single-phase helical CT is effective for the diagnosis and assessment of resectability of patients with suspected pancreatic carcinoma. Advantages are the lower radiation dose and fewer images to film and store.

Dual-phase versus single-phase helical CT to detect and assess resectability of pancreatic carcinoma

Mainenti;P P;Romano M;
2002

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to compare dual-phase and single-phase helical CT for the detection and assessment of resectability of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. We studied 60 patients (31 men, 29 women; age range, 31-84 years; mean age, 62 years) with suspected pancreatic malignancy. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups. For group A (n = 30), unenhanced scans through the liver and pancreas were followed by two separate acquisitions (dual-phase) at 20-25 and at 60-80 sec after IV contrast administration. For group B (n = 30), unenhanced scans were followed by one set of scans (single-phase) acquired caudocranially (from the inferior hepatic margin to the diaphragm) starting 50 sec after IV contrast administration. Two observers independently scored images for the presence of tumor and for assessment of tumor resectability. RESULTS. Comparison of dual-phase versus single-phase helical CT for tumor detection showed a diagnostic accuracy for observer 1 of 87% and 90%, respectively, and for observer 2, of 90% and 87%, respectively. For both helical CT techniques, the overall agreement between the two observers was 83% (? = 0.73 ± 0.03) for single-phase helical CT and 90% (? = 0.89 ± 0.03) for dual-phase helical CT. The assessment of resectability was affected by the low number of resectable tumors (n = 8). CONCLUSION. Single-phase helical CT is effective for the diagnosis and assessment of resectability of patients with suspected pancreatic carcinoma. Advantages are the lower radiation dose and fewer images to film and store.
2002
contrast medium
iopamidol
adult
aged
article
cancer surgery
clinical trial
computer assisted tomography
contrast enhancement
controlled clinical trial
controlled study
diagnostic imaging
diagnostic value
female
film
human
image analysis
major clinical study
male
pancreas adenocarcinoma
pancreas carcinoma
pancreas surgery
priority journal
radiation dose
randomized controlled trial
technique
Adenocarcinoma
Adult
Aged
Aged
80 and over
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Pancreatic Neoplasms
Prospective Studies
Tomography
X-Ray Computed
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14243/211220
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 36
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact