Search

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Ductal adenocarcinoma in the head of the pancreas (PDAC) is usually unresectable at the time of diagnosis due to the involvement of the peripancreatic vessels. Various preoperative classification algorithms have been developed to describe the relationship of the tumor to these vessels, but most of them lack a surgically based approach. We present a CT-based classification algorithm for PDAC based on surgical resectability principles with a focus on interobserver variability. METHODS: Thirty patients with PDAC undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy were examined by using a standard CT protocol. Nine radiologists, representing three different levels of expertise, evaluated the CT examinations and the tumors were classified into four categories (A-D) according to the proposed system. For the interobserver agreement, the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) was estimated. RESULTS: The overall ICC was 0.94 and the ICCs among the trainees, experienced radiologists, and experts were 0.85, 0.76, and 0.92, respectively. All tumors classified as category A1 showed no signs of vascular invasion at surgery. In category A2, 40% of the tumors had corresponding infiltration and required resection of the superior mesenteric vein/portal vein (SMV/PV). One of two tumors in category B2 and two of three in category C required SMV/PV resection. All six patients in category D had both arterial and venous involvement. CONCLUSION: There is almost perfect agreement among radiologists with different levels of expertise in regards to the local staging of PDAC. For tumors in a more advanced preoperative category, an increased risk for vascular involvement was noticed at surgery.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is associated with dismal prognosis. The detection of small pancreatic tumors which are still resectable is still a challenging problem.The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of decreasing the tube voltage from 120 to 80 kV on the detection of pancreatic tumors. METHODS: Three scanning protocols was used; one using the standard tube voltage (120 kV) and current (160 mA) and two using 80 kV but with different tube currents (500 and 675 mA) to achieve equivalent dose (15 mGy) and noise (15 HU) as that of the standard protocol.Tumors were simulated into collected CT phantom images. The attenuation in normal parenchyma at 120 kV was set at 130 HU, as measured previously in clinical examinations, and the tumor attenuation was assumed to differ 20 HU and was set at 110HU. By scanning and measuring of iodine solution with different concentrations the corresponding tumor and parenchyma attenuation at 80 kV was found to be 185 and 219 HU, respectively.To objectively evaluate the differences between the three protocols, a multi-reader multi-case receiver operating characteristic study was conducted, using three readers and 100 cases, each containing 0-3 lesions. RESULTS: The highest reader averaged figure-of-merit (FOM) was achieved for 80 kV and 675 mA (FOM=0,850), and the lowest for 120 kV (FOM=0,709). There was a significant difference between the three protocols (p<0,0001), when making an analysis of variance (ANOVA). Post-hoc analysis (students t-test) shows that there was a significant difference between 120 and 80 kV, but not between the two levels of tube currents at 80 kV. CONCLUSION: We conclude that when decreasing the tube voltage there is a significant improvement in tumor conspicuity., De två första författarna delar förstaförfattarskapet.

Background: A thorough understanding of magnetic resonance (MR) contrast media dynamics makes it possible to choose the optimal contrast media for each investigation. Differences in visualizing hepatobiliary function between Gd-BOPTA and Gd-EOB-DTPA have previously been demonstrated, but less has been published regarding differences in liver vessel visualization.Purpose: To compare the liver vessel and liver parenchymal enhancement dynamics of Gd-BOPTA (MultiHance®) and Gd-EOB-DTPA (Primovist®). Material and Methods: The signal intensity of the liver parenchyma, the common hepatic artery, the middle hepatic vein, and a segmental branch of the right portal vein, was obtained in 10 healthy volunteers before contrast media administration, during arterial and portal venous phases, and 10, 20, 30, 40 and 130 minutes after intravenous contrast medium injection, but due to scanner limitations not during the hepatic venous phase. Results: Maximum enhancement of liver parenchyma was observed from the portal venous phase until 130 minutes after Gd-BOPTA administration and from 10 minutes to 40 minutes after Gd-EOB-DTPA. There was no difference in maximum enhancement of liver parenchyma between the two contrast media. When using Gd-BOPTA, the vascular contrast enhancement was still apparent 40 minutes after injection, but had vanished 10 minutes after Gd-EOB-DTPA injection. The maximum difference in signal intensity between the vessels and the liver parenchyma was significantly greater with Gd-BOPTA than with Gd-EOB-DTPA (p<0.0001). Conclusion: At the dosage used in this study Gd-BOPTA yields higher maximum enhancement of the hepatic artery, portal vein and middle hepatic vein during the arterial and the portal venous phase and during the delayed phases than Gd-EOB-DTPA does, whereas there is no difference in liver parenchymal enhancement between the two contrast agents.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the biliary enhancement dynamics of the two gadolinium chelates Gd-BOPTA (MultiHance) and Gd-EOB-DTPA (Primovist) in normal healthy subjects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ten healthy volunteers were evaluated with both agents by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging at 1.5T using a breath-hold gradient-echo T1-weighted VIBE sequence. The relative signal intensity (SI) differences between the common hepatic duct (CHD) and liver parenchyma were measured before and 10, 20, 30, 40, 130, 240, and 300 min after contrast medium injection. RESULTS: Biliary enhancement was obvious 10 min post-injection for Gd-EOB-DTPA and was noted at 20 min for Gd-BOPTA. At 40 min delay, Gd-BOPTA reached its peak biliary enhancement, but at neither 30 nor 40 min delay was there any significant difference compared with that of Gd-EOB-DTPA. At later delays, the contrast between CHD and liver continued to increase for Gd-EOB-DTPA, whereas it decreased for Gd-BOPTA. CONCLUSION: The earlier onset and longer duration of a high contrast between CHD and liver for Gd-EOB-DTPA facilitates examination of hepatobiliary excretion. Therefore, Gd-EOB-DTPA may provide adequate hepatobiliary imaging within a shorter time span than Gd-BOPTA and facilitate scheduling at the MR unit. Further studies in patients are required to compare the imaging advantages of Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-BOPTA in clinical practice., This is an electronic version of an article published in: Nils Dahlström, Anders Persson, Nils Albiin, Örjan Smedby and Torkel Brismar, Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiography with Gd-BOPTA and Gd-EOB-DTPA in healthy subjects, 2007, Acta Radiologica, (48), 4, 362-368. Acta Radiologica is available online at informaworldTM: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02841850701196922 Copyright: Taylor & Francis http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/default.asp