HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Abdulla, C. Articles by Silverman, S. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Abdulla, C. Articles by Silverman, S. G. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Pseudoenhancement of Simulated Renal Cysts in a Phantom Using Different Multidetector CT Scanners

¹ Department of Radiology, Partners HealthCare System, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St., Boston, MA 02114.
² Department of Radiology, Partners HealthCare System, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115.

OBJECTIVE. We undertook this study to determine whether pseudoenhancement of renal cysts occurs on scans obtained with multidetector CT (MDCT) scanners and whether the effect is influenced by scanning parameters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. A kidney phantom with varying attenuation was created to simulate different levels of renal parenchymal enhancement (150 and 250 H). Two water-filled cylinders simulating renal cysts—one with a 5-mm diameter and one with a 15-mm diameter—were suspended in the "kidney." After validating the pseudoenhancement effect produced in our phantom model with a single-detector helical CT scanner, we investigated the effect with matrix array and adaptive array MDCT scanners using detector configurations of 1.25 and 2.5 mm and beam pitches of 0.75:1.0 and 1.5:1.0 at an effective reconstructed slice thickness of approximately 3 mm. Three sets of experiments were performed at each setting, and mean cyst density was measured. Data were statistically analyzed using the Student's t test and multiple logistic regression analysis when appropriate.

RESULTS. Although pseudoenhancement was observed with MDCT scanners, the effect was statistically significant only for scans depicting the smaller cyst at a background renal density of 250 H on the matrix array MDCT. Modulation of scanning parameters did not alter these findings. Pseudoenhancement was significantly higher with the matrix array MDCT scanner than with the adaptive array MDCT scanner (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION. In our phantom model, high levels of renal enhancement produced pseudoenhancement in small renal cysts with different models of MDCT scanners, irrespective of pitch or detector configuration.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R Spendiff and A Rockall Imaging assessment of renal masses Imaging, September 1, 2008; 20(3): 205 - 214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Z. J. Wang, F. V. Coakley, Y. Fu, B. N. Joe, S. Prevrhal, L. A. Landeras, E. M. Webb, and B. M. Yeh Renal Cyst Pseudoenhancement at Multidetector CT: What Are the Effects of Number of Detectors and Peak Tube Voltage? Radiology, September 1, 2008; 248(3): 910 - 916. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. M. Israel and M. A. Bosniak Pitfalls in Renal Mass Evaluation and How to Avoid Them1 RadioGraphics, September 1, 2008; 28(5): 1325 - 1338. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. A. Birnbaum, N. Hindman, J. Lee, and J. S. Babb Renal Cyst Pseudoenhancement: Influence of Multidetector CT Reconstruction Algorithm and Scanner Type in Phantom Model Radiology, September 1, 2007; 244(3): 767 - 775. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. M. Israel and M. A. Bosniak How I Do It: Evaluating Renal Masses Radiology, August 1, 2005; 236(2): 441 - 450. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]