Медицинская литература. Новинки

 

 

 

 

 

 

Влияние параметров низкодозового протокола сканирования на результаты текстурного анализа протоковой аденокарциномы поджелудочной железы

Вы можете загрузить полный текст статьи в формате pdf

Цель. Изучение зависимости текстурных показателей при КТ протоковой аденокарциномы поджелудочной железы от применения стандартных и низкодозовых параметров сканирования. Материал и методы. В исследование включено 52 пациента с гистологически подтвержденной неметастатической местнораспространенной протоковой аденокарциномой поджелудочной железы, которым выполняли КТ с использованием стандартных (120 кВ) и низкодозовых (100 кВ) протоколов сканирования. Сравнивали текстурные показатели гистологически идентичных опухолей во все фазы сканирования. Результаты. Получено 53 текстурных показателя для всех типов дифференцировки протоковой аденокарциномы поджелудочной железы в каждую фазу сканирования. Из 53 показателей текстурного анализа менее половины статистически различались для каждой фазы сканирования - 11 (20,8%) показателей для нативной фазы, 18 (34%) - для артериальной, 19 (35,8%) - для венозной и отсроченной фаз сканирования при всех типах дифференцировки опухоли (GLCM_Contrast, GLCM_Correlation, GLCM_Dissimilarity, GLRLM_ SRHGE и пр., р 0,05). Диагностическая точность >50% показателей сохраняется при изменении напряжения на трубке в протоколе КТ. Заключение. Применение низкодозового протокола КТ не влияет на диагностическую точность показателей текстурного анализа в предоперационной оценке степени дифференцировки протоковой аденокарциномы поджелудочной железы.

Ключевые слова:
поджелудочная железа, аденокарцинома, компьютерная томография, текстурный анализ, низкодозовый протокол, прогнозирование степени дифференцировки, pancreas, adenocarcinoma, CT-scan, texture analysis, low-dose scanning protocol, predicting the degree of differentiation

Литература:
1.Zhou Q., Melton D.A. Pancreas regeneration. Nature. 2018; 557 (7705): 351-358. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0088-0.
2.Leung P.S. Physiology of the pancreas. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2010; 690: 13-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9060-7_2
3.McGuigan A., Kelly P., Turkington R.C., Jones C., Coleman H.G., McCain R.S. Pancreatic cancer: a review of clinical diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment and outcomes. World J. Gastroenterol. 2018; 24 (43): 4846-4861. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v24.i43.4846
4.Mostafa M.E., Erbarut-Seven I., Pehlivanoglu B., Adsay V. Pathologic classification of “pancreatic cancers”: current concepts and challenges. Chin. Clin. Oncol. 2017; 6 (6): 59-59. https://doi.org/10.21037/cco.2017.12.01
5.Ansari D., Tingstedt B., Andersson B., Holmquist F., Sturesson C., Williamsson C., Sasor A., Borg D., Bauden M., Andersson R. Pancreatic cancer: yesterday, today and tomorrow. Future Oncol. 2016; 12 (16): 1929-1946. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2016-0010
6.Lu D.S., Vedantham S., Krasny R.M., Kadell B., Berger W.L., Reber H.A. Two-phase helical CT for pancreatic tumors: pancreatic versus hepatic phase enhancement of tumor, pancreas, and vascular structures. Radiology. 1996; 199 (3): 697-701. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.199.3.8637990
7.Treadwell J.R., Zafar H.M., Mitchell M.D., Tipton K., Teitelbaum U., Jue J. Imaging tests for the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis. Pancreas. 2016; 45 (6): 789-795. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0000000000000524
8.Bronstein Y.L., Loyer E.M., Kaur H., Choi H., David C., DuBrow R.A., Broemeling L.D., Cleary K.R., Charnsangavej C. Detection of small pancreatic tumors with multiphasic helical CT. AJR. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2004; 182 (3): 619-623. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.182.3.1820619
9.Prokesch R.W., Chow L.C., Beaulieu C.F., Bammer R., Jeffrey Jr. R.B. Isoattenuating pancreatic adenocarcinoma at multi-detector row CT: secondary signs. Radiology. 2002; 224 (3): 764-768. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2243011284.
10.Holm J., Loizou L., Albiin N., Kartalis N., Leidner B., Sundin A. Low tube voltage CT for improved detection of pancreatic cancer: detection threshold for small, simulated lesions. BMC Med. Imaging. 2012; 12 (1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2342-12-20
11.Machicado J.D., Koay E.J., Krishna S.G. Radiomics for the diagnosis and differentiation of pancreatic cystic lesions. Diagnostics. 2020; 10 (7): 505. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10070505
12.Goyen M. Radiogenomic imaging-linking diagnostic imaging and molecular diagnostics. World J. Radiol. 2014; 6 (8): 519-522. https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v6.i8.519
13.Yamashita R., Perrin T., Chakraborty J., Chou J.F., Horvat N., Koszalka M.A., Midya A., Gonen M., Allen P., Jarnagin W.R., Simpson A.L. Radiomic feature reproducibility in contrastenhanced CT of the pancreas is affected by variabilities in scan parameters and manual segmentation. Eur. Radiol. 2020; 30 (1): 195-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06381-8
14.Nagtegaal I.D., Odze R.D., Klimstra D., Paradis V., Rugge M., Schirmacher P., Washington K.M., Carneiro F., Cree I.A., WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board. The 2019 WHO classification of tumours of the digestive system. Histopathology. 2020; 76 (2): 182-188. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13975
15.Washington M.K., Berlin J., Branton P.A., Burgart L.J., Carter D.K., Compton C.C., Fitzgibbons P.L., Frankel W.L., Jessup J.M., Kakar S., Minsky B., Nakhleh R.E., Vauthey J.N., Members of the Cancer Committee, College of American Pathologists. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinoma of the distal extrahepatic bile ducts. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2010; 134 (4): 8-13. https://doi.org/10.1043/1543-2165-134.4.e8
16.Nioche C., Orlhac F., Boughdad S., Reuze S., Goya-Outi J., Robert C., Pellot-Barakat C., Soussan M., Frouin F., Buvat I. LIFEx: a freeware for radiomic feature calculation in multimodality imaging to accelerate advances in the characterization of tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Res. 2018; 78 (16): 4786-4789. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-0125
17.Mei S., Wang M., Sun L. Contrast-enhanced EUS for differential diagnosis of pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterol. Res. Pract. 2019; 2019: 1670183. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1670183
18.Parkin D.M., Bray F., Ferlay J., Pisani P. Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int. J. Cancer. 2001; 94 (2): 153-156. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.1440
19.Тюрин И.Е. Лучевая диагностика в Российской Федерации в 2016 г. Вестник рентгенологии и радиологии. 2016; 98 (4): 219-226. https://doi.org/10.20862/0042-4676-2017-98-4-219-226
20.Seeram E. Radiation dose in computed tomography. Radiol. Technol. 1999; 70 (6): 534-556.
21.Scheffel H., Alkadhi H., Leschka S., Plass A., Desbiolles L., Guber I., Krauss T., Gruenenfelder J., Genoni M., Luescher T.F., Marincek B., Stolzmann P. Low-dose CT coronary angiography in the step-and-shoot mode: diagnostic performance. Heart (British Cardiac Society). 2008; 94 (9): 1132-1137. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2008.149971
22.Kondratyev E., Karmazanovsky G. Low radiation dose 256-MDCT angiography of the carotid arteries: effect of hybrid iterative reconstruction technique on noise, artifacts, and image quality. Eur. J. Radiol. 2013; 82 (12): 2233-2239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.08.053
23.Pregler B., Beyer L.P., Teufel A., Niessen C., Stroszczynski C., Brodoefel H., Wiggermann P. Low tube voltage liver MDCT with sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstructions for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma. Sci. Rep. 2017; 7 (1): 9460. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-10095-6
24.Zhang H., Ma Y., Lyu J., Yang Y., Yuan W., Song Z. Low kV and low concentration contrast agent with iterative reconstruction of computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography: a preliminary study. Med. Sci. Monit. 2017; 23: 5005-5010. https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.904251
25.Marin D., Choudhury K.R., Gupta R.T., Ho L.M., Allen B.C., Schindera S.T., Colsher J.G., Samei E., Nelson R.C. Clinical impact of an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm for detection of hypervascular liver tumours using a low tube voltage, high tube current MDCT technique. Eur. Radiol. 2013; 23 (12): 3325-3335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2964-1
26.Kulkarni A., Carrion-Martinez I., Jiang N.N., Puttagunta S., Ruo L., Meyers B.M., Aziz T., van der Pol C.B. Hypovascular pancreas head adenocarcinoma: CT texture analysis for assessment of resection margin status and high-risk features. Eur. Radiol. 2020; 30 (5): 2853-2860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06583-0
27.Yun G., Kim Y.H., Lee Y.J., Kim B., Hwang J.H., Choi D.J. Tumor heterogeneity of pancreas head cancer assessed by CT texture analysis: association with survival outcomes after curative resection. Sci. Rep. 2018; 8 (1): 7226. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-25627-x
28.Chu L.C., Park S., Kawamoto S., Fouladi D.F., Shayesteh S., Zinreich E.S., Graves J.S., Horton K.M., Hruban R.H., Yuille A.L., Kinzler K.W., Vogelstein B., Fishman E.K. Utility of CT radiomics features in differentiation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from normal pancreatic tissue. AJR. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2019; 213 (2): 349-357. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.20901

Influence of the low-dose CE-MDCT scanning protocol parameters on the results of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma radiomic analysis

Aim. To investigate the dependence of textural parameters of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma on using standard and low-dose CT protocols. Materials and methods. The study included 52 consecutive patients with histologically confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent contrast enhanced computed tomography using standard (120 kV) and low-dose (100 kV) scanning protocols. We compared radiomics features of the identical histological tumors in all scanning phases. Results. We calculated 53 radiomics features in all types of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma grade differentiation for all scanning phases. We identified that out of 53 features of texture analysis, less than half was statistically different for each scan phase (11 parameters (20.8%) for the unenhanced phase; 18 parameters (34%) for the arterial; 19 parameters (35.8%) for the venous and delayed scanning phases), in all types of tumor differentiation (GLCM_ Contrast, GLCM_Correlation, GLCM_Dissimilarity, GLRLM_SRHGE etc., p 0.05).The diagnostic accuracy of more than 50% of the radiomics features is preserved when changing kV in the CT scan protocol. Conclusion. The use of a low-dose CT protocol doesn’t affect the diagnostic accuracy of the features of texture analysis in the preoperative assessment of the degree of differentiation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Keywords:
поджелудочная железа, аденокарцинома, компьютерная томография, текстурный анализ, низкодозовый протокол, прогнозирование степени дифференцировки, pancreas, adenocarcinoma, CT-scan, texture analysis, low-dose scanning protocol, predicting the degree of differentiation