4.5 Article

Dual-Energy CT for the Assessment of Contrast Material Distribution in the Pulmonary Parenchyma

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY
卷 193, 期 1, 页码 144-149

出版社

AMER ROENTGEN RAY SOC
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.08.1653

关键词

dual-energy CT; iodine distribution maps; pulmonary embolism; pulmonary perfusion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and diagnostic value of dual-energy CT iodine mapping at pulmonary CT angiography. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Ninety-three patients underwent CT angiography with the dual-energy technique on a dual-source CT scanner. Postprocessing was used to map iodine in the lung parenchyma on the basis of its spectral behavior, and image quality was assessed by two readers. Iodine distribution patterns were rated as homogeneous, patchy, or circumscribed defects. Conventional CT angiographic images reconstructed from the same data sets were reviewed for the presence and localization of pulmonary embolism, whether embolic occlusion was partial or complete, and the presence of changes in the lung parenchyma. Dual-energy perfusion findings were correlated with the CT angiographic and lung-window CT findings in per-patient and per-segment analyses. RESULTS. Iodine distribution was homogeneous in 49 patients, of whom CT angiography showed no pulmonary embolism in 46 patients and nonocclusive pulmonary emboli in three patients. Images of 29 patients showed a patchy pattern; 24 of these patients had no pulmonary embolism, and five had nonocclusive pulmonary emboli with solely nonocclusive intravascular clots. Images of 15 patients showed segmental or subsegmental defects; four of these patients had evidence of pulmonary embolism, and 11 had occlusive pulmonary emboli with at least one occlusive clot in the pulmonary vasculature. CONCLUSION. Dual-energy CT is reliable in the detection of defects in pulmonary parenchymal iodine distribution that correspond to embolic vessel occlusion.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据