AJR Your Link to CME
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, M.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, K. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kim, M.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, K. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
DOI:10.2214/AJR.05.0257
AJR 2006; 187:198-206
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Original Research

Optimal Scan Window for Detection of Hypervascular Hepatocellular Carcinomas During MDCT Examination

Myeong-Jin Kim1,2,3, Jin Young Choi1,3, Joon Seok Lim3, Jin Yong Kim1,3, Joo Hee Kim3, Young Taik Oh1,3, Eun Hye Yoo1,3, Jae Joon Chung1 and Ki Whang Kim1

1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seodaemun-ku Shinchon-dong 134, Seoul, 120-752, South Korea.
2 Institute of Gastroenterology and Brain Korea 21 Project for Medical Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
3 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.

Received February 15, 2005; accepted after revision May 25, 2005.

 
Address correspondence to M.-J. Kim (kimnex{at}yumc.yonsei.ac.kr).


Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to define the optimal scan window for acquiring arterial phase images in the detection of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Biphasic arterial phase CT examinations were performed using a 16-MDCT scanner on 198 patients (159 men and 39 women; mean age, 59 years; age range, 25-82 years) with nodular HCC. All examinations were performed after administering 120-150 mL of a nonionic contrast media (370 mg I/mL) at a rate of 3-4 mL/s. The scan delay—the interval between when the bolus-tracking program detected the threshold enhancement of 100 H in the abdominal aorta and the start of the first arterial scan—was progressively lengthened by 2-second intervals, from 10 seconds in group 1 to 20 seconds in group 6. The second arterial phase scan was started 6 seconds after the end of the early scan. A tube collimation of 1.5 mm, a table feed of 18 mm per rotation, an image thickness of 3 mm, and 3-mm increments were used. The duration of each phase scan was 4.5-8.8 seconds. Tumor-to-liver attenuation difference (TLAD) at the first (TLAD1) and second (TLAD2) arterial phase images were compared lesion by lesion. Four observers assigned subjective ratings of visual conspicuity and individual preferences for each phase in each group.

RESULTS. The mean threshold time (100 H) was 18.4 ± 3.1 seconds, and 97% of patients were within the range of 13-24 seconds. The mean TLAD1 of groups 3 to 6 and the mean TLAD2 of groups 1 to 5 were all comparable; they were also all significantly (p < 0.005) higher than the mean TLAD1 of groups 1 and 2 and the mean TLAD2 of group 6. In groups 1 and 2, the mean TLAD2 was significantly higher than the mean TLAD1 (p < 0.001); in groups 5 and 6, the mean TLAD1 was significantly higher than the mean TLAD2 (p < 0.001). In groups 3 and 4, the mean TLAD1 and TLAD2 were similar. The visual conspicuity and individual preferences were higher for the first-phase image in groups 3 to 6 and the second-phase image in groups 1 and 2.

CONCLUSION. The optimal scan window for arterial phase images in the detection of HCC seems to be approximately 14-30 seconds from the 100-H threshold.

Keywords: abdomen • contrast media • CT technique • hepatocellular carcinoma • liver • MDCT


Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
The optimization of CT techniques for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) detection is still a challenge to radiologists. Because most HCCs are supplied by hepatic arterial flow and the healthy liver is dominantly supplied from portal venous flow, a hypervascular HCC is best observed in timed arterial phase images. In these images, the tumor is maximally enhanced, whereas the surrounding liver is not [1-6]. Using an MDCT scanner, dual-phase scanning of the whole liver in one breath-hold has become feasible [7, 8]. Some investigators have found that double arterial phase scanning may improve the detection of hypervascular HCC [8, 9]. However, this conclusion was not unanimously supported by other investigators; most hypervascular HCCs show a better conspicuity on late arterial CT images than on early arterial phase CT images [7, 10-13]. In studies using double arterial phase CT, the "early" and "late" arterial phase scans correspond to the "pure arterial" and "portal venous inflow" phase scans, respectively, as defined by Foley [14]. Using a 4-MDCT scanner, approximately 9-12 seconds is needed for a single-phase scan of the entire liver. Therefore, the time needed for one breath-hold dual-phase CT of the liver is 23-26 seconds, including an interscan delay. With the development of 16-MDCT, the scanning time could be further reduced; the entire liver can be scanned in 4-6 seconds, and a single breath-hold dual-phase scan can be performed in 12-16 seconds. Consequently, optimizing the scan window has become critical, and the utility of a dual-phase scan in a single breath-hold needs to be reassessed.


Figure 1
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1 Diagram of scan protocol over time axis in each group. Bolus tracking was started 10 seconds after start of injection of contrast medium (CM). The 100-H threshold scan delay time for early scan was 10 seconds in group (GR) 1 and was increased by 2-second increments in each group. Interscan delay was fixed at 6 seconds. Number of patients (pts) and number of hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) are displayed in parentheses.

 
This study sought to define the optimal scan window for the acquisition of arterial phase images in HCC detection using a 16-MDCT scanner.


Materials and Methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
Patient Population
An approval by the institutional review board was exempted for this study. Because the quadriphasic CT protocol we used in this study—including unenhanced, double arterial, and delayed phase CT scans—was already incorporated as routine for the evaluation of patients with suspected or known HCC, written informed consent was waived. Between February 2003 and August 2003, 590 patients underwent dynamic CT examinations of the liver in our institute for the evaluation of a known or suspected HCC using a 16-MDCT scanner (Somatom Sensation 16, Siemens Medical Solutions). For this study, only patients who were diagnosed with hypervascular and nodular HCC (i.e., those showing hyperattenuation at one of the two consecutive arterial phase scans and hypoattenuation or isoattenuation during the delayed phases) were included for analysis. The study excluded 65 patients with diffuse or infiltrative HCCs, 32 with large (> 5 cm in diameter) nodular HCCs showing markedly heterogeneous attenuation at both phase scans, 12 with focal lesions other than HCC (eight hemangiomas, two cysts, one cholangiocarcinoma, and one metastasis), nine with only unconfirmed lesions, and 15 without focal liver lesions. Also excluded were 207 patients who had HCCs that were previously treated by transarterial embolization or percutaneous ablation therapy in the absence of recurrence and 52 patients with protocol violations because of a suboptimal injection rate (< 3 mL/s), extravasation of contrast media, or inadequate or absence of bolus-tracking technique data. After all the exclusions, 198 consecutive patients (159 men and 39 women; mean age, 59 years; age range, 25-82 years) with nodular HCCs were included in this study. Among them, 108 patients (87 men and 21 women; mean age, 58.9 years; age range, 38-82 years) had a history of selective transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) of an HCC at least 2 months before the CT examination. In these patients, only newly developed lesions in the hepatic lobes that were not affected in the prior TACE were included.

If multiple HCC nodules were observed in a patient, up to five lesions from different parts of the liver (right upper, right middle, right lower, left upper, and left lower) were selected to eliminate cluster bias. Ultimately, 323 HCC lesions (size range, 0.4-4.9 cm; mean, 1.7 cm) were included. HCC diagnosis was based on results from surgical resection (n = 30), on results of percutaneous biopsy (n = 26), on elevation of tumor markers ({alpha}-fetoprotein, protein-induced vitamin-K absence, or antagonist II) with typical CT or MRI findings in patients with liver cirrhosis or chronic liver disease (n = 82), or on typical CT or MRI findings combined with typical angiographic appearance (that of a hypervascular tumor with neovascularity) and notable iodized oil uptake in follow-up CT scans (n = 60). Liver cirrhosis was evident in 173 patients and was a result of hepatitis B (n = 128), hepatitis C (n = 40), Budd-Chiari syndrome (n = 2), or alcoholism (n = 3). The remaining 25 patients had hepatitis B (n = 21) or C (n = 4) without cirrhosis.

CT Technique
All CT examinations were performed after the injection of 120-150 mL of iopamidol (Iopamiro, Bracco) at a concentration of 370 mg I/mL and at a rate of 3-4 mL/s using a power injector (EnVision CT, Medrad) (Fig. 1). A 2 mL/kg dose of contrast media was administered to patients whose body weight was 60-75 kg. The total dose was fixed at 150 mL for patients weighing more than 75 kg and at 120 mL for patients weighing less than 60 kg. The injection rate was determined by the accessibility of the venous route, but a rate of 4 mL/s was used in most patients. The scan delay was determined using bolus-tracking software. For bolus tracking, a series of nonhelical sequential images were obtained 10 seconds after the administration of contrast agent. These images were acquired with a scanning time of 0.5 seconds (360°) using a low-dose radiation technique (120 kV, 20 mA) and a cycle time of 1.25 seconds. In each image, an approximately 1-cm2 area of a circular region of interest (ROI) was placed in the abdominal aorta at the level of the celiac artery; the attenuation value (Hounsfield unit [H]) was then measured [15]. The time at which the bolus-tracking program detected the threshold enhancement of 100 H in the abdominal aorta was defined as the threshold point, and the time interval between the start of the contrast material injection and the threshold point was defined as the threshold time. The scan delay time was defined as the time between the threshold point and the start of the first scan. The interscan delay time was defined as the time interval between the end of the first scan and the start of the second scan; this was fixed at 6 seconds for every examination because it was the lowest limit the system allowed for two scans to be performed in the same direction. The study was conducted over 30 weeks, divided into six 5-week intervals. During the first 5 weeks of this study, the arterial scan was performed by starting 10 seconds after the 100-H threshold at the aorta; the scan delay was lengthened by 2 seconds by 5-week intervals until it reached 20 seconds. The patients were consecutively allocated into one of the six groups: All patients who underwent the examinations during the first five weeks of the study period were assigned to group 1; the other groups were assigned at 5-week intervals. In each group, the scan delay varied as follows: 10 seconds in group 1 (24 men and five women; mean age, 57.7 years; 54 HCCs), 12 seconds in group 2 (22 men and nine women; mean age, 58.8 years; 52 HCCs), 14 seconds in group 3 (30 men and five women; mean age, 59.3 years; 52 HCCs), 16 seconds in group 4 (34 men and five women; mean age, 59.5 years; 55 HCCs), 18 seconds in group 5 (29 men and eight women; mean age, 57.8 years; 58 HCCs), and 20 seconds in group 6 (20 men and seven women; mean age, 59.9 years; 52 HCCs). We used a scan delay of 10 seconds or more to obtain the liver images after the end of the pure arterial phase.

Biphasic arterial and delayed phase scans were performed in all patients during a single breath-hold period. For all scans, a craniocaudal scan was performed with the following parameters: 0.5-second rotation, 120 kV, 300 mAs, tube collimation of 1.5 mm, table feed of 18 mm per rotation, image thickness of 3 mm, and a 3-mm increment reconstruction. The duration of each phase scan was 4.5-8.8 seconds (mean, 6.4 seconds), depending on the selected scan ranges. Therefore, the time interval between the same scan levels was 10.5-14.8 seconds (mean, 12.7 seconds). A delayed scan was performed 180 seconds after contrast medium injection. This scan was used in the diagnosis of HCC, but not in the data analysis. An unenhanced scan was also performed and was used to calculate the degree of hepatic enhancement in each phase of the scan. Both unenhanced and delayed scans were also performed with the same parameters as the biphasic scan. The scanning time of a lesion was defined as the time of the slice depicting the craniocaudal center of the lesion of interest. Meanwhile, the lesion delay time was defined as the time between the threshold point and the scanning time of a lesion. In all lesions, the scanning time of a lesion was recorded, whereas the lesion delay time was calculated using the following equation: image delay time = scan delay time + (scanning time of a lesion - scanning time of the first slice of the first arterial phase). The specific time annotated on each image by the scan system was used to calculate the scan delay and lesion delay.

Image Analysis
A circular ROI was drawn on the tumor and hepatic parenchyma by the primary investigator to measure attenuation values. The area of the ROI in the tumor was set to measure the homogeneous area of the lesion, which was maintained at a size of at least 50 mm2. For lesions with necrotic components, care was taken to measure the area only in the solid portion of the lesion. If a lesion was poorly depicted on either of the two arterial phase images, the location where the lesion was seen on other phase images was used. While being sure not to include vessels, the ROI of the liver was drawn on the hepatic parenchyma near the tumor and was maintained at a size of at least 100 mm2. The size of the ROIs of the tumor and liver were kept the same in their respective phase images. The tumor-to-liver attenuation difference (TLAD) on each scan was measured to obtain a lesion-by-lesion comparison of the differences in the contrast of the HCC between the first and second arterial scans. TLAD was defined as Hle - Hli, where Hle is the attenuation (H) of the lesion and Hli is the attenuation of the surrounding liver. TLAD1 was the value measured from the first arterial phase image, and TLAD2 was the value measured from the second arterial phase image. When TLAD1 was greater than TLAD2, the lesion was considered to have higher contrast on the first arterial phase image, whereas the lesion was considered to have higher contrast on the second arterial phase image when TLAD2 was greater than TLAD1. The mean values and SDs of TLAD1 and TLAD2 were calculated for each group (Fig. 1). The number of lesions showing a higher contrast on the first or second arterial phase scans was counted in each group. The ROI of the liver was also measured on the unenhanced CT scan, and the degree of the liver enhancement (Lipost - Lipre, where Lipost is the liver attenuation from the contrast-enhanced image and Lipre is the liver attenuation from the unenhanced image) was calculated.

To perform the qualitative analysis, four observers retrospectively and randomly reviewed all of the cases without any knowledge of the scan delay times. The radiologists had 4-12 years of experience in abdominal imaging. The first and second arterial phase images were compared side by side at a PACS workstation (PathSpeed version 8.1 or Centricity version 1.0, GE Healthcare). The images were reviewed at the soft-tissue setting of both a moderate window width and window level (450 H and 60 H, respectively) and a narrow window width and window level (300 H and 50 H, respectively); the interpreters were then free to adjust the settings according to their preferences. The observers assigned the following subjective ratings of visual conspicuity: 1, the lesion was more conspicuous on the first arterial phase image; 2, the lesion showed a similar conspicuity on the two phase images; or 3, the lesion was more conspicuous on the second arterial phase image. The observers also recorded their individual preferences according to which phase image they would select if only one of the two phase images could be obtained. They also recorded the number of the lesions that were seen on each phase image. The final number of these lesions was determined in conference by the consensus of the four interpreters.

Statistical Analysis
Among the six groups, the sex of the patients was statistically compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. A one-way analysis of variance was performed to compare patients' ages, lesion sizes, and threshold times. Pearson's correlation coefficient was calculated to determine the relationship between threshold time and age. An independent sample Student's t test was performed to compare the difference in threshold time between men and women. The time interval between the thresholds of 50 H and 100 H in the abdominal aorta was calculated. To determine the effect of previous transarterial embolization, an independent sample Student's t test was performed to compare the differences in threshold time, tumor and liver attenuation in each phase scan, and TLAD values in each phase between those who had previously undergone transarterial embolization and those who had not.

A one-way analysis of variance was performed to compare TLAD1 and TLAD2 values among the six groups. Post-hoc multiple comparisons were performed using the Bonferroni or Tamhane methods according to the homogeneity of the variance test results. In each group, TLAD1 and TLAD2 values were compared using a paired Student's t test. The McNemar test was performed to compare the detection rates between the first and the second arterial phases.

Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated to compare the attenuation values of the liver and tumor and the TLAD at the early- and late-phase images (TLAD1 vs TLAD2). Pearson's correlation coefficients were also calculated to determine the correlation between the lesion delay time and the attenuation of the liver, the tumor, and the TLAD at each phase. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered significant in all tests.


Results
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
There were no significant differences in patient sex, age, tumor size, or number of lesions between the groups (Table 1). The 100-H threshold time showed wide variation; the mean threshold time in all of the patients was 18.44 ± 3.14 (SD) seconds (range, 10-29 seconds). One hundred ninety-two (97%) patients showed threshold times within the range of 13-24 seconds. The mean threshold times were slightly shorter in women (17.23 ± 3.89 seconds) than in men (18.74 ± 2.87 seconds) (p = 0.027). The mean threshold times between the groups were not significantly different (p > 0.05). There were no significant correlations between age and threshold time. The time needed for the ROI values in the aorta to reach 50 H was 16.81 ± 2.82 seconds, whereas the average time difference between the threshold of 50 H and 100 H was 1.63 ± 1.07 seconds. The threshold time and the TLADs in each phase were not significantly different from those who had undergone transarterial embolization previously and those who had not (Table 2).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 1: Group Characteristics

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 2: Comparison of Patients With and Without Transarterial Embolization

 

The attenuation values for the liver gradually increased from groups 1 to 6 in both the first and second arterial phase images (Figs. 2A, 2B, and 2C). The TLADs showed a wide range in each group for both the first and second arterial phase images. The mean TLAD1 of group 1 was significantly lower than those in groups 3 to 6 (p < 0.05), and that of group 2 was significantly lower than those of groups 4 and 5 (p < 0.05). The mean TLAD2 was relatively constant from groups 1 to 5, but that of group 6 was significantly lower than that of groups 1 to 5 (p < 0.05). The mean TLAD1 of groups 3 to 6 and the mean TLAD2 of groups 1 to 5 were comparable.


Figure 2
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2A Box-and-whisker plots show median (middle line of each box), quartiles (top and bottom lines of each box), and upper and lower adjacent (upper and lower whiskers for each box) values for (A) tumor, (B) liver, and (C) tumor-to-lesion attenuation difference (TLAD) in each group in first- (light gray) and second- (dark gray) phase images. Attenuation of tumor gradually increased in first-phase images in groups 1 through 5; attenuation of tumor gradually increased in second-phase images in groups 1 through 4, but decreased in groups 5 and 6.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2B Box-and-whisker plots show median (middle line of each box), quartiles (top and bottom lines of each box), and upper and lower adjacent (upper and lower whiskers for each box) values for (A) tumor, (B) liver, and (C) tumor-to-lesion attenuation difference (TLAD) in each group in first- (light gray) and second- (dark gray) phase images. Attenuation value of liver gradually increased from groups 1 to 6 for both phase images.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2C Box-and-whisker plots show median (middle line of each box), quartiles (top and bottom lines of each box), and upper and lower adjacent (upper and lower whiskers for each box) values for (A) tumor, (B) liver, and (C) tumor-to-lesion attenuation difference (TLAD) in each group in first- (light gray) and second- (dark gray) phase images. Mean value for TLAD1 gradually increased in groups 1 through 4 with increasing scan delay time. Mean TLAD1 of groups 4 through 6 and mean TLAD2 of groups 1 through 4 were not statistically significant.

 
In groups 1 and 2, TLAD2 was higher than TLAD1 for most lesions; furthermore, the mean TLAD2 was significantly higher than the mean TLAD1 (p < 0.001) (Figs. 2A, 2B, and 2C). Subjective ratings for the visual conspicuity and the interpreters' preferences were also better for the second arterial images in these groups (Figs. 3A, 3B, and 3C). In groups 3 and 4, the number of lesions in which TLAD2 was higher than TLAD1 was slightly higher, but the mean TLAD1 and TLAD2 were not significantly different. The subjective scores of lesion conspicuity and interpreter preference were rated higher more often for the first arterial phase image in groups 3 and 4 (Figs. 4A and 4B). In groups 5 and 6, TLAD1 was higher than TLAD2 for most lesions, the mean TLAD1 was significantly higher than the mean TLAD2 (p < 0.001), and the subjective ratings for visual conspicuity and interpreter preference were more often assigned to the first arterial image (Figs. 5A and 5B). The overall detection rate for the lesions in the first and the second arterial phases, which were 99.7% (322/323) and 99.1% (320/323), respectively, were not significantly different. One lesion in group 2 was not seen on the first-phase scan, whereas three lesions were not seen in the second-phase scan (from groups 2, 4, and 5) (Figs. 6A and 6B). In the first scan, the TLAD1 was less than 10 H in three patients in group 1 and one patient in group 3. For the second scan, TLAD2 was less than 10 H in 11 lesions: one lesion in group 1, three lesions in group 2, one lesion in group 3, three lesions in group 5, and three lesions in group 6.


Figure 5
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3A Bar graphs indicate number of lesions that showed (A) higher tumor-to-liver attenuation difference (TLAD), (B) visual conspicuity, and (C) interpreter preference in each phase image in each group. Gray bars denote number of lesions for which TLAD1 was greater than TLAD2, and black bars represent number of lesions for which TLAD2 was greater than TLAD1. In groups 1 to 4, larger number of lesions showed higher contrast in second arterial phase image than in first arterial phase image. In groups 5 and 6, larger number of lesions showed higher contrast in first arterial phase images.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3B Bar graphs indicate number of lesions that showed (A) higher tumor-to-liver attenuation difference (TLAD), (B) visual conspicuity, and (C) interpreter preference in each phase image in each group. Bar graph indicates summation of four interpreters' subjective rating of conspicuity of each lesion. Gray bars denote total number of lesions that were subjectively rated as being more conspicuous in first-phase image in each group by four interpreters. Hatched bars denote total number of lesions that were rated as having similar conspicuity in first- and second-phase images. Black bars denote total number of lesions that were rated as being more conspicuous in second-phase image.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3C Bar graphs indicate number of lesions that showed (A) higher tumor-to-liver attenuation difference (TLAD), (B) visual conspicuity, and (C) interpreter preference in each phase image in each group. Bar graph indicates total number of lesions preferred by four interpreters. Gray bars denote total number of lesions in which interpreters preferred first-phase image, and black bars represent total number of lesions in which interpreters preferred second-phase image. In groups 1 and 2, more lesions were preferred at second arterial phase. In groups 3 through 6, more lesions were preferred at first arterial phase.

 

Figure 8
View larger version (92K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4A 64-year-old woman from group 2 with small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at dome of liver (arrows). Small HCC lesion is barely visible in first-phase image.

 

Figure 9
View larger version (104K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4B 64-year-old woman from group 2 with small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at dome of liver (arrows). Second-phase image clearly depicts heterogeneously enhancing hypervascular HCC. Most lesions in groups 1 and 2 showed better contrast in second-phase image.

 

Figure 10
View larger version (143K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5A 43-year-old man from group 4 with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on left lobe of liver (arrows). First-phase image shows hypervascular tumor.

 

Figure 11
View larger version (135K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5B 43-year-old man from group 4 with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on left lobe of liver (arrows). Lesion is barely discernible in second-phase image. Patient underwent right hepatectomy previously, and fluid-filled bowel loops are seen in right hepatic fossa.

 

Figure 12
View larger version (128K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6A 65-year-old man from group 6 with small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on right lobe of liver. First-phase image clearly shows hypervascular tumor (arrow).

 

Figure 13
View larger version (147K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6B 65-year-old man from group 6 with small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on right lobe of liver. Lesion is not seen in second-phase image. In this patient, second scan is actually taken at portal venous or hepatic parenchymal phase. Note substantial enhancement of hepatic parenchyma and hepatic vein (arrowhead).

 
The attenuation values of the liver at the early and late arterial phase images showed a strong positive correlation with each other (R = 0.868, p < 0.01) and also the attenuation of the tumor (R = 0.791, p < 0.01). TLAD1 and TLAD2 showed a moderately positive correlation with each other (R = 0.650, p < 0.01). The lesion delay time was moderately or weakly positively correlated with the attenuation values of the liver (R = 0.494, p < 0.01 for the early phase; R = 0.430, p < 0.01 for the late phase) and the tumor (R = 0.475, p < 0.01 for the early phase; R = 0.112, p < 0.01 for the late phase). The lesion delay time showed a weakly positive correlation with TLAD1 (R = 0.282, p < 0.01) and a weakly negative correlation with TLAD2 (R = -0.214, p < 0.01).


Discussion
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
In a study using single-detector CT, Lee et al. [16] suggested that a temporal window from 36 to 56 seconds was optimal for HCC detection in arterial phase imaging. However, they also admitted that there is no single fixed scan delay that is optimal for all lesions because of wide individual variations. Frederick et al. [17] suggested an even shorter temporal window limit (less than 45 seconds) for the detection of hypervascular lesions.

Using 4-MDCT, several authors have studied different settings for double arterial phase CT [7-11]. Because of hardware limitations in the 4-MDCT scanner, one of the early or late arterial phase CT images was deemed to be too early or too late for optimally depicting hypervascular HCCs in studies that used double arterial CT. Using a 16-MDCT scanner, the scanning time of the entire liver could be decreased to 4-6 seconds. Therefore, optimizing the scan window has become even more critical.

The results of our study showed that the first arterial scans in groups 3 to 6 (scan delay, 14-20 seconds) and the second scans in groups 1 to 5 (scan delay, 23-30 seconds) provided comparable TLAD values, subjective lesion conspicuity, and lesion detection rates that were favorable compared with the earlier or later scans. From these results, the optimal scan delay for arterial phase images seems to be approximately 14 to 30 seconds from the 100-H threshold. Because the individual variation of the 100-H threshold times ranged from 10 to 29 seconds in our study, the optimal total scan delay for patients with a 10-second 100-H threshold would be 24-40 seconds, whereas for patients with a 29-second 100-H threshold the optimal total scan delay would be 41-59 seconds. Therefore, a fixed scan window that would meet the optimal scan range for all patients cannot be determined. However, because the 100-H threshold time of 97% patients is within 13-24 seconds, a scan window that is 38 (24 + 14) to 43 (13 + 30) seconds from the start of contrast agent injection may be within the optimal range of scan delay. This temporal window for hypervascular tumor detection is comparable to those suggested by Lee et al. [16] and Frederick et al. [17] using a single-detector CT. Although our data suggest that a fixed scan delay may be justified in many patients, using a bolus-tracking technique should be recommended in patients with cardiovascular problems. Nonetheless, there is still a possibility that the use of a bolus-tracking technique allows more accurate planning of the scan. At this time, we cannot be sure whether the two different techniques—using a bolus-tracking or using a fixed scan delay—shows a significant difference in detection sensitivity and lesion conspicuity. Therefore, further studies comparing these two techniques are warranted.

There are several differences in study design and results between our study and the study of Murakami et al. [18], in which middle arterial scans obtained with a fixed 30-second delay showed higher sensitivity than 20-second or 40-second delay scans after administration of 100 mL of 300 mg I/mL nonionic contrast medium at 4 mL/s. Compared with our study, they used a fixed scan delay and a smaller amount of contrast medium. Also, the injection of the contrast agent in their study was finished within 25 seconds. In our study, the contrast agent injection period was 30-37.5 seconds because 120-150 mL of contrast medium was administered. Although there was a significant difference in HCC detection sensitivity between groups in the Murakami et al. study, the detection rates were not remarkably different between the several groups in our study. In our study, the higher dose of contrast agent and the optimization of scan delay using the bolus-tracking method might have improved overall HCC detection sensitivity and decreased its difference between the groups.

Our data suggest that the first-phase images in groups 3 and 4 showed hypervascular HCCs at the upslope of TLAD, whereas the second arterial images were at the downslope of TLAD after their peak values. In these groups, the TLAD values were generally higher at the second arterial phase image, but the subjective ratings of the lesion conspicuity and the interpreter preference were generally higher for the first arterial phase image. This may be explained by the fact that the liver and the healthy vasculature are typically less enhanced in the first-phase image; this is favored by interpreters in the visual perception of the true lesions. However, because the tumor was not yet fully enhanced, the TLAD values were not different between the early and the late scans. With a scan delay of 14-20 seconds, a tumor may be less enhanced than its peak values, but the enhancement of background liver or venous structure can be minimized. Using this scan delay time, liver enhancement is usually within the range of 10-20 H, or 20-40% when compared with the unenhanced CT. Meanwhile, a longer scan delay of 20-30 seconds may provide higher enhancement of the tumor, but also higher enhancement of the liver and the portal veins.

Sandstede et al. [15] suggested that a delay of 10 seconds after the 75-H threshold was the optimal scan delay for the arterial phase after the injection of 120 mL of contrast material at 3 mL/s. In their study, the optimal arterial phase was determined by calculating the value at which 20-30% of the maximum hepatic enhancement occurred. Our data suggest that liver enhancement of 20-60% (relative to the unenhanced images) may be acceptable for the detection of hypervascular tumors if one can achieve tumor enhancement higher than hepatic enhancement. Some authors have suggested 20 H of hepatic enhancement to be the end of the arterial phase [17, 19]. In our study, the first arterial phase images in groups 4 through 6 were comparable to the range at which the liver enhancement was between 10 and 20 H. Furthermore, the second arterial phase image from groups 1 through 4 showed hepatic enhancement of 20-30 H.

The optimal temporal window suggested in this study may not be long enough for a single-detector CT unit to scan the entire liver. Therefore, by using a total scan delay of 20-30 seconds, which is recommended for the depiction of hypervascular tumors in some reports [20, 21], the upper slice of the arterial phase image may be too early or the lower slice of the images may be too late. Using a 4-MDCT unit, it is possible to obtain an entire image of the liver within this window. If double arterial phase examinations are performed using a 4-MDCT unit, the early arterial phase images may be too early or the late arterial phase images may be too late [6, 22, 23]. Therefore, in our opinion, double arterial CT examination may not be warranted when we can optimize the scan delay using a bolus-tracking method. By shortening the scanning time with a 16-MDCT unit, double arterial phase images can be obtained with a similar level of lesion conspicuity.

Our data do not suggest that using a double arterial phase examination significantly increases the sensitivity of MDCT for the detection of hypervascular HCCs. Our data showed that tumors strongly enhanced in the first arterial phase image also tended to remain strongly enhanced in the second arterial phase image. This suggests that lesion conspicuity may depend more on the intrinsic characteristics of the tumor itself (such as vascularity or histologic type) than on the optimal scan delay. Therefore, even if dual arterial phase images are obtained, a relatively hypovascular lesion may still be difficult to see. As shown in the comparison of detection sensitivities between the two arterial phase images, nearly all lesions that were seen in one of the arterial phase images were also seen in the other arterial phase image. Currently, hepatic CT examinations in our institute for the evaluation of HCC include a single late arterial phase image (20 seconds from the 100-H threshold), portal or hepatic venous phase images (70-second delay from the start of contrast material injection), and delayed equilibrium phase images (180-second delay).

One of the limitations of this study is that most of the lesions were not pathologically confirmed. This study used strict criteria to exclude pseudotumors, such as an arterioportal shunt or a transient attenuation difference, based on information from a combination of findings (such as delayed phase CT images, MRI or angiography, prior and follow-up CT, and tumor markers). Although the inclusion of non-HCC hypervascular lesions, such as hypervascular dysplastic nodules, or the exclusion of true HCC lesions that might be not detected may have been possible, we believe that this would not greatly alter our results because these were based on the comparison of the biphasic scans for a large number of clinically or pathologically confirmed lesions.

To obtain both of the two phase images in the late arterial or portal inflow phase, we began the first scan at least 10 seconds after the 100-H threshold point in our study. We used at least a 10-second delay because of reports suggesting that the mean duration of the pure arterial phase was 8-12 seconds [14, 19, 24, 25]. We used a 100-H threshold in this study, whereas some authors used 50 or 75 H to define the aortic arrival of contrast material [9, 15]. Our data showed that the difference in the threshold time between 50 H and 100 H was less than 2 seconds. Therefore, we may adjust the scan delay according to this result. From the results of our study, we recommend using 100 H as a threshold point and starting the arterial scan 20 seconds after the threshold. Because the mean and median values of the 100-H threshold fall at 18 seconds, this protocol results in approximately a 38-second delay in most cases. Recently, we launched a study comparing this technique with a fixed scan delay of 38 seconds.

Approximately half of our study population had a history of TACE for an HCC lesion in another part of the liver. However, our results showed no significant difference in the threshold time and the tumor-to-lesion contrast between the TACE and non-TACE groups. Furthermore, we excluded HCC lesions in the same segment of the previous TACE lesions. Therefore, we believe that the inclusion of previous TACE patients would not affect the results of this study.

It is possible that a different injection rate or iodine concentration may have affected the threshold time or the optimal scan delay. Therefore, further studies assessing the effect of iodine concentration or injection rate will be necessary to define the optimal scan delay for each concentration and injection protocol more precisely. We have launched a study that compares lesion conspicuity and sensitivity according to the dose and injection rate using a scan delay determined in this study.

In conclusion, our results suggest that the optimal scan window for arterial phase images in the detection of HCC seems to be approximately 14 to 30 seconds from the 100-H threshold. For the margin of safety, we recommend a 20-second delay from the 100-H threshold as optimal scan timing for 16-MDCT. However, it should be adjusted according to injection protocol and the available scan system.


References
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 

  1. Ohashi I, Hanafusa K, Yoshida T. Small hepatocellular carcinomas: two-phase dynamic incremental CT in detection and evaluation. Radiology 1993;189 : 851-855[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Bonaldi VM, Bret PM, Reinhold C, Atri M. Helical CT of the liver: value of an early hepatic arterial phase. Radiology1995; 197:357 -363[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Hollett MD, Jeffrey RB Jr, Nino-Murcia M, Jorgensen MJ, Harris DP. Dual-phase helical CT of the liver: value of arterial phase scans in the detection of small (≤ 1.5 cm) malignant hepatic neoplasms. AJR 1995; 164:879 -884[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Baron RL, Oliver JH 3rd, Dodd GD 3rd, Nalesnik M, Holbert BL, Carr B. Hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation with biphasic, contrast-enhanced, helical CT. Radiology 1996;199 : 505-511[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Cho JS, Kwag JG, Oh YR, Han SD, Song CJ. Detection and characterization of hepatocellular carcinoma: value of dynamic CT during the arterial dominant phase with uniphasic contrast medium injection. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996;20 : 128-134[CrossRef][Medline]
  6. Hwang GJ, Kim MJ, Yoo HS, Lee JT. Nodular hepatocellular carcinomas: detection with arterial-, portal-, and delayed-phase images at spiral CT. Radiology 1997;202 : 383-388[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Foley WD, Mallisee TA, Hohenwalter MD, Wilson CR, Quiroz FA, Taylor AJ. Multiphase hepatic CT with a multirow detector CT scanner. AJR 2000; 175:679 -685[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Murakami T, Kim T, Takamura M, et al. Hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma: detection with double arterial phase multi-detector row helical CT. Radiology 2001;218 : 763-767[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Kim T, Murakami T, Hori M, et al. Small hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma revealed by double arterial phase CT performed with single breath-hold scanning and automatic bolus tracking. AJR 2002; 178:899 -904[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Laghi A, Iannaccone R, Rossi P, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma: detection with triple-phase multi-detector row helical CT in patients with chronic hepatitis. Radiology 2003;226 : 543-549[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Ichikawa T, Kitamura T, Nakajima H, et al. Hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma: can double arterial phase imaging with multidetector CT improve tumor depiction in the cirrhotic liver? AJR2002; 179:751 -758[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Kim SK, Lim JH, Lee WJ, et al. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of dynamic three-phase computed tomography images and four-phase computed tomography images using multidetector row helical computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002;26 : 691-698[CrossRef][Medline]
  13. Kim HC, Kim TK, Sung KB, et al. Preoperative evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma: combined use of CT with arterial portography and hepatic arteriography. AJR 2003;180 : 1593-1599[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Foley WD. Special focus session: multidetector CT—abdominal visceral imaging. RadioGraphics 2002;22 : 701-719[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Sandstede JJ, Tschammler A, Beer M, Vogelsang C, Wittenberg G, Hahn D. Optimization of automatic bolus tracking for timing of the arterial phase of helical liver CT. Eur Radiol 2001;11 : 1396-1400[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Lee KH, Choi BI, Han JK, Jang HJ, Kim TK, Han MC. Nodular hepatocellular carcinoma: variation of tumor conspicuity on single-level dynamic scan and optimization of fixed delay times for two-phase helical CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000;24 : 212-218[CrossRef][Medline]
  17. Frederick MG, McElaney BL, Singer A, et al. Timing of parenchymal enhancement on dual-phase dynamic helical CT of the liver: how long does the hepatic arterial phase predominate? AJR1996; 166:1305 -1310[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Murakami T, Kim T, Kawata S, et al. Evaluation of optimal timing of arterial phase imaging for the detection of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma by using triple arterial phase imaging with multidetector-row helical computed tomography. Invest Radiol2003; 38:497 -503[CrossRef][Medline]
  19. Kopka L, Rodenwaldt J, Fischer U, Mueller DW, Oestmann JW, Grabbe E. Dual-phase helical CT of the liver: effects of bolus tracking and different volumes of contrast material. Radiology1996; 201:321 -326[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Miller FH, Butler RS, Hoff FL, Fitzgerald SW, Nemcek AA Jr, Gore RM. Using triphasic helical CT to detect focal hepatic lesions in patients with neoplasms. AJR 1998;171 : 643-649[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Francis IR, Cohan RH, McNulty NJ, et al. Multidetector CT of the liver and hepatic neoplasms: effect of multiphasic imaging on tumor conspicuity and vascular enhancement. AJR2003; 180:1217 -1224[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Kim T, Murakami T, Takahashi S, et al. Optimal phases of dynamic CT for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation of unenhanced and triple-phase images. Abdom Imaging 1999;24 : 473-480[CrossRef][Medline]
  23. Lim JH, Choi D, Kim SH, et al. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma: value of adding delayed phase imaging to dual-phase helical CT. AJR 2002; 179:67 -73[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. O'Riordan E, Craven CM, Wilson D, Robinson PJ. Dual phase hepatic CT: influence of scanning direction on liver attenuation. AJR 2000; 174:1417 -1421[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Bader TR, Prokesch RW, Grabenwoger F. Timing of the hepatic arterial phase during contrast-enhanced computed tomography of the liver: assessment of normal values in 25 volunteers. Invest Radiol 2000; 35:486 -492[CrossRef][Medline]

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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
X. Ma, A. E. Samir, N.-S. Holalkere, and D. V. Sahani
Optimal Arterial Phase Imaging for Detection of Hypervascular Hepatocellular Carcinoma Determined by Continuous Image Capture on 16-MDCT
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2008; 191(3): 772 - 777.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
Y. Yanaga, K. Awai, T. Nakaura, T. Namimoto, S. Oda, Y. Funama, and Y. Yamashita
Optimal Contrast Dose for Depiction of Hypervascular Hepatocellular Carcinoma at Dynamic CT Using 64-MDCT
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2008; 190(4): 1003 - 1009.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
L. L. Chu, B. N. Joe, A. C. A. Westphalen, E. M. Webb, F. V. Coakley, and B. M. Yeh
Patient-specific Time to Peak Abdominal Organ Enhancement Varies with Time to Peak Aortic Enhancement at MR Imaging
Radiology, December 1, 2007; 245(3): 779 - 787.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, M.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, K. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kim, M.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, K. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS