Daniele Marin

Preoperative imaging of rectal carcinoma involves accurate assessment of the primary tumor as well as distant metastatic disease. Preoperative imaging of nonrectal colon cancer is most beneficial in identifying distant metastases, regardless of primary T or N stage. Surgical treatment remains the definitive treatment for colon cancer, while organ-sparing approach may be considered in some rectal cancer patients based on imaging obtained before and after neoadjuvant treatment. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT) imaging uses a new detector technology to provide added information beyond what can already be obtained with current CT and MR technologies. This review provides an overview of PCCT of the abdomen and focuses specifically on applications that benefit the most from this new imaging technique. We describe the requirements for a successful abdominal PCCT acquisition and the challenges for clinical translation. The review highlights work done within the last year with an emphasis on new protocols that have been tested in clinical practice. Applications of PCCT include imaging of cystic lesions, sources of bleeding, and cancers. Photon-counting CT is positioned to move beyond detection of disease to better quantitative staging of disease and measurement of treatment response.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate a novel algorithm for noise reduction in obese patients using dual-source dual-energy (DE) CT imaging. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with contrast-enhanced abdominal imaging (54 women; age: 58 ± 14 years; BMI: 39 ± 5 kg/m2, range: 35-62 kg/m2) from seven DECT (SOMATOM Flash or Force) were retrospectively included (01/2019-12/2020). Image domain data were reconstructed with the standard clinical algorithm (ADMIRE/SAFIRE 2), and denoised with a comparison (ME-NLM) and a test algorithm (rank-sparse kernel regression). Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was calculated. Four blinded readers evaluated the same original and denoised images (0 (worst)-100 (best)) in randomized order for perceived image noise, quality, and their comfort making a diagnosis from a table of 80 options. Comparisons between algorithms were performed using paired t-tests and mixed-effects linear modeling. RESULTS: Average CNR was 5.0 ± 1.9 (original), 31.1 ± 10.3 (comparison; p < 0.001), and 8.9 ± 2.9 (test; p < 0.001). Readers were in good to moderate agreement over perceived image noise (ICC: 0.83), image quality (ICC: 0.71), and diagnostic comfort (ICC: 0.6). Diagnostic accuracy was low across algorithms (accuracy: 66, 63, and 67% (original, comparison, test)). The noise received a mean score of 54, 84, and 66 (p < 0.05); image quality 59, 61, and 65; and the diagnostic comfort 63, 68, and 68, respectively. Quality and comfort scores were not statistically significantly different between algorithms. CONCLUSIONS: The test algorithm produces quantitatively higher image quality than current standard and existing denoising algorithms in obese patients imaged with DECT and readers show a preference for it. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Accurate diagnosis on CT imaging of obese patients is challenging and denoising algorithms can increase the diagnostic comfort and quantitative image quality. This could lead to better clinical reads. KEY POINTS: • Improving image quality in DECT imaging of obese patients is important for accurate and confident clinical reads, which may be aided by novel denoising algorithms using image domain data. • Accurate diagnosis on CT imaging of obese patients is especially challenging and denoising algorithms can increase quantitative and qualitative image quality. • Image domain algorithms can generalize well and can be implemented at other institutions.

PURPOSE: To compare liver fat quantification between MRI and photon-counting CT (PCCT). METHOD: A cylindrical phantom with inserts containing six concentrations of oil (0, 10, 20, 30, 50 and 100%) and oil-iodine mixtures (0, 10, 20, 30 and 50% fat +3 mg/mL iodine) was imaged with a PCCT (NAEOTOM Alpha) and a 1.5 T MRI system (MR 450w, IDEAL-IQ sequence), using clinical parameters. An IRB-approved prospective clinical evaluation included 12 obese adult patients with known fatty liver disease (seven women, mean age: 61.5 ± 13 years, mean BMI: 30.3 ± 4.7 kg/m2). Patients underwent a same-day clinical MRI and PCCT of the abdomen. Liver fat fractions were calculated for four segments (I, II, IVa and VII) using in- and opposed-phase on MRI ((Meanin - Meanopp)/2*Meanin) and iodine-fat, tissue decomposition analysis in PCCT (Syngo.Via VB60A). CT and MRI Fat fractions were compared using two-sample t-tests with equal variance. Statistical analysis was performed using RStudio (Version1.4.1717). RESULTS: Phantom results showed no significant differences between the known fat fractions (P = 0.32) or iodine (P = 0.6) in comparison to PCCT-measured concentrations, and no statistically significant difference between known and MRI-measured fat fractions (P = 0.363). In patients, the mean fat signal fraction measured on MRI and PCCT was 13.1 ± 9.9% and 12.0 ± 9.0%, respectively, with an average difference of 1.1 ± 1.9% between the modalities (P = 0.138). CONCLUSION: First experience shows promising accuracy of liver fat fraction quantification for PCCT in obese patients. This method may improve opportunistic screening for CT in the future.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate task-based radiomic features extracted from the mesenteric-portal axis for prediction of survival and response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: Consecutive patients with PDAC who underwent surgery after neoadjuvant therapy from two academic hospitals between December 2012 and June 2018 were retrospectively included. Two radiologists performed a volumetric segmentation of PDAC and mesenteric-portal axis (MPA) using a segmentation software on CT scans before (CTtp0) and after (CTtp1) neoadjuvant therapy. Segmentation masks were resampled into uniform 0.625-mm voxels to develop task-based morphologic features (n = 57). These features aimed to assess MPA shape, MPA narrowing, changes in shape and diameter between CTtp0 and CTtp1, and length of MPA segment affected by the tumor. A Kaplan-Meier curve was generated to estimate the survival function. To identify reliable radiomic features associated with survival, a Cox proportional hazards model was used. Features with an ICC  ≥ 0.80 were used as candidate variables, with clinical features included a priori. RESULTS: In total, 107 patients (60 men) were included. The median survival time was 895 days (95% CI: 717, 1061). Three task-based shape radiomic features (Eccentricity mean tp0, Area minimum value tp1, and Ratio 2 minor tp1) were selected. The model showed an integrated AUC of 0.72 for prediction of survival. The hazard ratio for the Area minimum value tp1 feature was 1.78 (p = 0.02) and 0.48 for the Ratio 2 minor tp1 feature (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Preliminary results suggest that task-based shape radiomic features can predict survival in PDAC patients. KEY POINTS: • In a retrospective study of 107 patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery for PDAC, task-based shape radiomic features were extracted and analyzed from the mesenteric-portal axis. • A Cox proportional hazards model that included three selected radiomic features plus clinical information showed an integrated AUC of 0.72 for prediction of survival, and a better fit compared to the model with only clinical information.