TY - JOUR
T1 - Hepatic computed tomography perfusion
T2 - Comparison of maximum slope and dual-input single-compartment methods
AU - Kanda, Tomonori
AU - Yoshikawa, Takeshi
AU - Ohno, Yoshiharu
AU - Kanata, Naoki
AU - Koyama, Hisanobu
AU - Nogami, Munenobu
AU - Takenaka, Daisuke
AU - Sugimura, Kazuro
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgments. The authors thank Yoshikazu Kotani, MD and Yoshihiro Nishimura, MD, PhD (Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine) and Yoshimasa Maniwa, MD, PhD and Wataru Nishio, MD (Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine) for their contribution to this work. The authors also wish to express special thanks to Hiroyasu Inokawa, MS, Nao Kishitani, BS, Yasuko Fujisawa, BS, Naoki Sugihara, MEng, and Akira Taniguchi, RT, (Toshiba Medical Systems) and Shintaro Funabasama, BS, (Toshiba Medical Systems Engineering) for their outstanding technical assistance in this work. This work was supported by Toshiba Medical Systems and Bayer Pharma.
Copyright:
Copyright 2011 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2010/12
Y1 - 2010/12
N2 - Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare two analytical methods-maximum slope (MS) and the dualinput single-compartment model (CM)-in computed tomography (CT) measurements of hepatic perfusion and to assess the effects of extrahepatic systemic factors. Materials and methods: A total of 109 patients underwent hepatic CT perfusion. The scans were conducted at the hepatic hilum 7-77 s after administration of contrast material. Hepatic arterial perfusion (HAP) and portal perfusion (HPP) (ml/min/100 ml) and the arterial perfusion fraction (APF, %) were calculated with the two methods, followed by correlation assessment. Partial correlation analysis was used to assess the effects on hepatic perfusion values by various factors, including age, sex, risk of cardiovascular disease, compensation for respiratory misregistration, arrival time of contrast material at the abdominal aorta, transit time from abdominal aorta to hepatic parenchyma, and liver dysfunction. Results: The mean HAPs, HPPs, and APFs were, respectively, 31.4, 104.2, and 23.9 for MS and 27.1, 141.3, and 22.1 for CM. HAP and APF showed significant (P < 0.0001) and moderate correlation (γ = 0.417 and 0.548) and HPP showed poor correlation (γ = 0.172) between the two methods. While MS showed weak correlations (γ = -0.39 to 0.34; P < 0.001 to <0.02) between multiple extrahepatic factors and perfusion values, CM showed weak correlation only between the patients' sex and HAP (γ = 0.31, P = 0.001). Conclusion: Hepatic perfusion values estimated by the two methods are not interchangeable. CM is less susceptible to extrahepatic systemic factors.
AB - Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare two analytical methods-maximum slope (MS) and the dualinput single-compartment model (CM)-in computed tomography (CT) measurements of hepatic perfusion and to assess the effects of extrahepatic systemic factors. Materials and methods: A total of 109 patients underwent hepatic CT perfusion. The scans were conducted at the hepatic hilum 7-77 s after administration of contrast material. Hepatic arterial perfusion (HAP) and portal perfusion (HPP) (ml/min/100 ml) and the arterial perfusion fraction (APF, %) were calculated with the two methods, followed by correlation assessment. Partial correlation analysis was used to assess the effects on hepatic perfusion values by various factors, including age, sex, risk of cardiovascular disease, compensation for respiratory misregistration, arrival time of contrast material at the abdominal aorta, transit time from abdominal aorta to hepatic parenchyma, and liver dysfunction. Results: The mean HAPs, HPPs, and APFs were, respectively, 31.4, 104.2, and 23.9 for MS and 27.1, 141.3, and 22.1 for CM. HAP and APF showed significant (P < 0.0001) and moderate correlation (γ = 0.417 and 0.548) and HPP showed poor correlation (γ = 0.172) between the two methods. While MS showed weak correlations (γ = -0.39 to 0.34; P < 0.001 to <0.02) between multiple extrahepatic factors and perfusion values, CM showed weak correlation only between the patients' sex and HAP (γ = 0.31, P = 0.001). Conclusion: Hepatic perfusion values estimated by the two methods are not interchangeable. CM is less susceptible to extrahepatic systemic factors.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79251534712&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79251534712&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11604-010-0497-y
DO - 10.1007/s11604-010-0497-y
M3 - Article
C2 - 21191735
AN - SCOPUS:79251534712
SN - 1867-1071
VL - 28
SP - 714
EP - 719
JO - Japanese journal of radiology
JF - Japanese journal of radiology
IS - 10
ER -