Comparison of pre- and postcontrast CT in hepatic masses

Berland, Lincoln L.; Lawson, Thomas L.; Foley, W. Dennis; Melrose, B. L.; Chintapalli, Kedar N.; Taylor, Angela

doi:10.2214/ajr.138.5.853

Cited by 50 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As in the prior survey, the methods of contrast administration, as one would expect, were variable, but there was a significant difference when compared with the 1987 study. Presumably, this is due to improvements in technology and increased information in the literature regarding the optimal techniques to detect liver metastases with CT [3,7,8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaging of the liver: a survey update of prevailing techniques for conventional CT scanning

1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaging of the liver: a survey update of prevailing techniques for conventional CT scanning

1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are also difficulties in the evaluation of lesions seen on CT, as the numerical values of individual lesions obtained at CT cannot in themselves be regarded as a reliable tool in differentiating benign from malignant lesions (5). There is no definite difference in the accuracy of CT without and with intravenous contrast enhancement (8). To try to improve the accuracy of CT of the liver, arterial contrast enhancement, CTA, has been used (20,25,29).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiologic Diagnosis of Liver Metastases in Colo-Rectal Carcinoma

Lundstedt¹,

Ekberg²,

Hederström³

et al. 1987

Acta Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To evaluate the accuracy of radiologic methods in liver metastases from colo-rectal carcinoma, a prospective investigation of 71 patients was performed. These patients were examined by angiography, ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT) and computed tomographic angiography (CTA). The primary aim of the investigation was to determine the accuracy of CTA. The results of these examinations were then compared with the results from inspection and palpation of the liver at laparotomy. An analysis of liver tumor distribution, as well as a lesion-by-lesion analysis, was performed. In 20 patients, tumor growth was found in the liver in 36 lobes/segments at laparotomy. Three patients called false positives (angiography 2, US, CT and CTA 3 patients) turned out to be true positives since the lesions were overlooked at operation. The changes in sensitivity obtained when these patients are considered are given in parentheses. Of the lobes/segments affected by tumor growth at surgery, angiography revealed 47 (48) per cent, US 69 (71) per cent, CT 80 (82) per cent and CTA 83 (84) per cent. At a lesion-by-lesion analysis, angiography showed 33 per cent, US 69 per cent, CT 61 per cent and CTA 76 per cent of the lesions. Because of a larger number of false positives recorded with CTA compared with CT the former examination is not suitable as a single method for evaluating resectability of liver metastases.

show abstract

“…Serial imaging inconsistency is particularly challenging as tumour lesions may slowly fill with contrast material over time and may thus misleadingly appear to have decreased in size. Likewise, variant contrast medium dynamics can cause changes in the visual appearance of lesion enhancement patterns and hence erroneously suggest a response to radiation or chemotherapy [18][19][20][21][22][23][24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%