期刊
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
卷 23, 期 8, 页码 2288-2295出版社
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2811-4
关键词
Dual-energy CT; Renal masses; Standard enhancement measurements; Iodine quantification; Diagnostic accuracy
To compare the diagnostic accuracy of iodine quantification and standard enhancement measurements in distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal masses. The Institutional Review Board approved this retrospective study conducted from data found in institutional patient databases and archives. Seventy-two renal masses were characterised as enhancing or nonenhancing using standard enhancement measurements (in HU) and iodine quantification (in mg/ml). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of standard enhancement measurements and iodine quantification were calculated from chi (2) tests of contingency with histopathology or imaging follow-up as the reference standard. Difference in accuracy was assessed by means of McNemar analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and diagnostic accuracy for standard enhancement measurements and iodine quantification were 77.7 %, 100 %, 100 %, 81.8 %, 89 % and 100 %, 94.4 %, 94.7, 100 % and 97 %, respectively. The McNemar analysis showed that the accuracy of iodine quantification was significantly better (P < 0.001) than that of standard enhancement measurements. Compared with standard enhancement measurements, whole-tumour iodine quantification is more accurate in distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal masses.
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。
推荐
暂无数据