Clinical radiology · 2021
Role of quantitative energy spectrum CT parameters in differentiating thymic epithelial tumours and thymic cysts.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhou Q, Huang X, Xie Y, Liu X, Li S, Zhou J
Аннотация
AIM: To explore the utility of multiple energy spectrum computed tomography (CT) parameters in distinguishing thymic epithelial tumours (TETs) from thymic cysts among lesions <5 cm in diameter.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data pertaining to 56 patients with TETs and thymic cysts <5 cm in diameter were assessed retrospectively. All patients underwent surgical resection and the diagnosis was confirmed histopathologically. Thirty-five patients with TETs (average age, 51.97 years) and 21 patients with thymic cysts (average age, 50.54 years) were included. The region of interest for the lesion on the energy spectrum CT was delineated on the post-processing workstation, and multiple parameters of the energy spectrum CT were obtained. The diagnostic efficacies of the parameters were analysed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.
RESULTS: To distinguish small TETs from thymic cysts, a single-energy CT value of 60 keV showed good differential diagnostic performance in the arterial phase (cut-off value = 68.42 HU; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.978), a single-energy CT value of 70 keV showed good differential diagnostic performance in the venous phase (cut-off value = 59.77 HU; AUC = 0.956). In the arterial and venous phases, effective atomic numbers of 8.065 and 8.175, respectively, were used as cut-off values to distinguish small TETs from thymic cysts (AUC = 0.972 and AUC = 0.961, respectively). Iodine concentrations of 10.99 and 11.05 were used as cut-off values to distinguish small TETs from thymic cysts (AUC = 0.956 and AUC = 0.924, respectively).
CONCLUSION: According to the present study, energy spectrum CT parameters may have clinical value in the differential diagnosis of TETs and thymic cysts.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data pertaining to 56 patients with TETs and thymic cysts <5 cm in diameter were assessed retrospectively. All patients underwent surgical resection and the diagnosis was confirmed histopathologically. Thirty-five patients with TETs (average age, 51.97 years) and 21 patients with thymic cysts (average age, 50.54 years) were included. The region of interest for the lesion on the energy spectrum CT was delineated on the post-processing workstation, and multiple parameters of the energy spectrum CT were obtained. The diagnostic efficacies of the parameters were analysed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.
RESULTS: To distinguish small TETs from thymic cysts, a single-energy CT value of 60 keV showed good differential diagnostic performance in the arterial phase (cut-off value = 68.42 HU; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.978), a single-energy CT value of 70 keV showed good differential diagnostic performance in the venous phase (cut-off value = 59.77 HU; AUC = 0.956). In the arterial and venous phases, effective atomic numbers of 8.065 and 8.175, respectively, were used as cut-off values to distinguish small TETs from thymic cysts (AUC = 0.972 and AUC = 0.961, respectively). Iodine concentrations of 10.99 and 11.05 were used as cut-off values to distinguish small TETs from thymic cysts (AUC = 0.956 and AUC = 0.924, respectively).
CONCLUSION: According to the present study, energy spectrum CT parameters may have clinical value in the differential diagnosis of TETs and thymic cysts.