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 Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Goh, V. Articles by Halligan, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Goh, V. Articles by Halligan, S. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Effect of Temporal Interval Between Scan Acquisitions on Quantitative Vascular Parameters in Colorectal Cancer: Implications for Helical Volumetric Perfusion CT Techniques

¹ Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Rickmansworth Rd., Northwood, Middlesex, HA6 2RN, United Kingdom.
² Present address: Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
³ Intestinal Imaging Centre, St. Mark's Hospital, Harrow, United Kingdom.
⁴ Specialist Radiology, University College Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine how the temporal interval between scan acquisitions influences quantitative perfusion CT vascular parameters in colorectal cancer.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Forty-five patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma prospectively underwent a 65-second single-anatomic-level perfusion CT study. Blood flow, blood volume, transit time, and permeability–surface area product for a 2-cm tumor coverage were determined with commercial software based on distributed parameter analysis for four temporal intervals (1, 2, 3, and 4 seconds) between acquisitions. Mean vascular values obtained for these intervals were compared by use of analysis of variance with posttesting by the Bonferroni method. Statistical significance was set at 5%.

RESULTS. Mean ± SD blood flow, volume, transit, and permeability–surface area product were 71.5 ± 34.8 mL/min/100 g tissue, 6.33 ± 1.96 mL/100 g tissue, 10.8 ± 5.54 seconds, and 14.9 ± 3.51 mL/min/100 g tissue, respectively, at 1 second; 86.6 ± 40.6 mL/min/100 g tissue, 6.30 ± 2.53 mL/100 g tissue, 10.7 ± 7.12 seconds, and 14.5 ± 3.55 mL/min/100 g tissue at 2 seconds; 97.8 ± 42.7 mL/min/100 g tissue, 5.98 ± 1.72 mL/100 g tissue, 8.11 ± 4.37 seconds, and 14.5 ± 3.58 mL/min/100 g tissue at 3 seconds; and 108.8 ± 46.0 mL/min/100 g tissue, 6.69 ± 3.46 mL/100 g tissue, 7.12 ± 3.54 seconds, and 13.9 ± 3.49 mL/min/100 g tissue at 4 seconds. Blood flow was overestimated (p = 0.0002) and transit underestimated (p = 0.03) with lengthening acquisition interval. Posttesting revealed that in a comparison with 1-second data, this difference was significant for 3- and 4-second data for blood flow and 4-second data for transit.

CONCLUSION. Increasing the temporal interval from 1 to 4 seconds leads to overestimation of tumor blood flow and underestimation of blood transit in distributed parameter analysis. Use of the helical perfusion CT techniques being developed may lead to inaccurate assessment unless the acquisition interval is shorter than 3 seconds.

Keywords: colon cancer • contrast agent • dynamic CT • perfusion CT • rectal cancer

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