|
|
||||||||
Gastrointestinal Imaging |
1 From the Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences (I.R.K., K.M.H., H.J.V.B., E.K.F., D.A.B.) and Department of Surgery (M.A.C.), Johns Hopkins Hospital, 600 N Wolfe St, Rm 100, Baltimore, MD 21287; Department of Radiology, New York University Medical Center, New York (B.A.B.); and Department of Biostatistics, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md (R.E.T.). Received October 31, 2001; revision requested January 18, 2002; final revision received October 2; accepted November 5. Address correspondence to I.R.K. (e-mail: ikamel@jhmi.edu).
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy and reproducibility of dual-phase helical computed tomography (CT) in enabling preoperative detection and characterization of surgically staged focal liver lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Surgically and histopathologically proven liver lesions were evaluated by three experienced CT readers. These lesions were present in 77 patients who underwent dual-phase helical CT. Images were interpreted separately by the three blinded reviewers. Each lesion was graded on a nine-point scale of confidence, with 1 being definitely benign, 9 being definitely malignant, and 5 being indeterminate. The
2 test was used to determine if the distribution of lesion classifications was different between readers.
RESULTS: There was a total of 237 lesions: 73 were benign and 164 were malignant. Sensitivity for lesion detection was 69%, 70%, and 71% for the three reviewers, respectively. Specificity was 91%, 86%, and 90%, and the area under the curve for the alternative-free response receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.84, 0.83, and 0.85, respectively. The difference in the distributions of lesion classification between the three reviewers was not statistically significant (P = .67) as determined by
2 analysis.
CONCLUSION: Dual-phase CT has sensitivity of 69%71% and high specificity (86%91%) in enabling the detection and characterization of focal liver lesions. Interpretation is highly reproducible, as there is minimal variation between experienced reviewers.
© RSNA, 2003
Index terms: Liver neoplasms, CT, 761.12112 Liver neoplasms, diagnosis, 761.31, 761.32 Liver neoplasms, metastases, 761.33
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. J. Kim, J. M. Lee, J. K. Han, K. H. Kim, J. Y. Lee, and B. I. Choi Peripheral Mass Forming Cholangiocarcinoma in Cirrhotic Liver Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2007; 189(6): 1428 - 1434. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Charnsangavej, B. Clary, Y. Fong, A. Grothey, T. M. Pawlik, and M. A. Choti Selection of Patients for Resection of Hepatic Colorectal Metastases: Expert Consensus Statement Ann. Surg. Oncol., October 1, 2006; 13(10): 1261 - 1268. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Bipat, M. S. van Leeuwen, E. F. I. Comans, M. E. J. Pijl, P. M. M. Bossuyt, A. H. Zwinderman, and J. Stoker Colorectal Liver Metastases: CT, MR Imaging, and PET for Diagnosis--Meta-analysis Radiology, October 1, 2005; 237(1): 123 - 131. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |