Pulmonary emphysema: the assessment of lung perfusion with Dual-Energy CT and pulmonary scintigraphy.

Aim: To assess the correlation of quantitative data of pulmonary Perfused Blood Volume (PBV) on Dual-Energy CT (DECT) datasets in patients with moderate - severe Pulmonary Emphysema (PE) with Lung Perfusion Scintigraphy (LPS) as the reference standard. The secondary endpoints are the correlation between the CT densitometric analysis and the visual assessment of parenchymal destruction with PBV.
Materials and Methods: Patients with moderate - severe PE candidate to Lung Volumetric Reduction (LVR), with available a pre-procedural LS and a contrast-enhanced DECT were retrospectively included. DECT studies were performed with a 3rd generation Dual-Source CT and the PBV was obtained with a 3-material decomposition algorithm. The CT densitometric analysis was performed with a dedicated commercial software (Pulmo3D). The Goddard Score was used for visual assessment. The perfusion LS were performed after the administration of albumin macroaggregates labeled with ^99m Technetium. The image revision was performed by two radiologists or nuclear medicine physicians blinded, respectively, to LS and DECT data. The statistical analysis was performed with nonparametric tests.
Results: Thirty-one patients (18 males, median age 69 y.o., interquartile range 62-71 y.o.) with moderate - severe PE (Median Goddard Score 14/20 and 31% of emphysematous parenchyma at quantitative CT) candidate to LVR were retrospectively included. The median enhancement on PBV was 17 HU. Significant correlation coefficients were demonstrated between lung PBV and LS, poor in apical regions (Rho = 0.1-0.2) and fair (Rho = 0.3-0.5) in middle and lower regions. No significant correlations were recorded between the CT densitometric analysis, the visual score, and the PBV.
Conclusions: Lung perfusion with PBV on DECT is feasible in patients with moderate - severe PE candidate to LVR, and has a poor to fair agreement with LPS.
Competing Interests: Declarations Conflict of interests The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. Ethical Approval This is a retrospective, observational study. The Local Research Ethics Committee has confirmed that no formal ethical approval is required.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)