Cargando…
Diagnostic accuracy of the attenuation value in abdominal contrast enhanced dynamic multi-detector-row computed tomography for esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis
PURPOSE: To investigate whether the attenuation value obtained by subtracting the CT value obtained from abdominal dynamic contrast enhanced (ADCE)-MDCT imaging of the equilibrium phase from the value obtained from that of the portal phase in hepatic parenchyma is useful in distinguishing normal liv...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8094905/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33997144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2021.100347 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: To investigate whether the attenuation value obtained by subtracting the CT value obtained from abdominal dynamic contrast enhanced (ADCE)-MDCT imaging of the equilibrium phase from the value obtained from that of the portal phase in hepatic parenchyma is useful in distinguishing normal liver from liver cirrhosis (LC) and to predict the development of esophageal varices (EVs) in patients with LC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assigned 72 outpatients to group A (n = 45; normal liver) and group B (n = 27; LC), who underwent ADCE-MDCT. The attenuation value and CT value of the hepatic parenchymal portal and equilibrium phase were compared, and the correlation between attenuation value and biomarkers (ALB, T-bil, PLT, FIB-4, APRI, and AAR) was investigated. Furthermore, we investigated differences in the attenuation value, FIB-4, APRI, and AAR between the two subgroups of group B [without EVs (group a) and with EVs (group b)]. We performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis of the attenuation value, FIB-4, APRI, and, AAR for subgroup a vs b and evaluated the diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Significant differences were observed between groups A and B in all items. The attenuation value correlated with ALB, T-bil, PLT, FIB-4, and APRI. Only attenuation value showed a significant difference between groups a and b. The best cut-off attenuation value, FIB-4, APRI, and AAR for predicting EVs, according to ROC analysis was 13.4 HU, 6.8, 1.9, and 1.5. CONCLUSIONS: Attenuation value can be useful to quantitatively classify normal liver and LC and to predict EVs in patients with LC. |
---|