Liver CT for vascular mapping during radioembolisation workup: comparison of an early and late arterial phase protocol.
OBJECTIVE
To compare right gastric (RGA) and segment 4 artery (A4) origin detection rates during radioembolisation workup between early and late arterial phase liver CT protocols.


METHODS
100 consecutive patients who underwent liver CT between May 2012-January 2015 with early or late arterial phase protocol (n = 50 each, 10- vs. 20-s post-threshold delay) were included. RGA/A4 origin detection rates, assessed by two raters, and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of the hepatic artery relative to the portal vein were compared between the protocols.


RESULTS
The first-second rater scored the RGA origin as visible in 58-65 % (specific proportion of agreement 82 %, κ = 0.62); A4 origin in 96-89 % (94 %, κ = 0.54). Thirty-six percent of RGA origins not detectable by DSA were identified on CT. Origin detection rates were not significantly different for early/late arterial phases. Mean CNR was higher in the early arterial phase protocol (1.7 vs. 1.2, p < 0.001).


CONCLUSIONS
A 10-s delay arterial phase CT protocol does not significantly improve detection of small intra- and extrahepatic branches. RGA origin detection requires further optimization, whereas A4/MHA origin detection is adequate, with good inter-rater reproducibility. CT remains important for preprocedural planning, because it may reveal arterial anatomy not discernible on DSA.


CONCLUSIONS
• An early arterial phase does not significantly improve RGA and A4/MHA origin detection. • RGA origin detection (58-65 %) on CT is still suboptimal. • 36 % of RGA origins undetectable on DSA can be identified on CT. • A4/MHA origin detection (89-96 %) on CT is excellent. • Inter-rater reproducibility is good for RGA and A4/MHA origin detection on CT.
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. a.f.vandenhoven@umcutrecht.nl.
Andor F
AF
van den Hoven
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Manon N G J A
MN
Braat
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jip F
JF
Prince
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Pieter J
PJ
van Doormaal
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Maarten S
MS
van Leeuwen
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marnix G E H
MG
Lam
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Maurice A A J
MA
van den Bosch
D000368:Aged; D004621:Embolization, Therapeutic / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006499:Hepatic Artery / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D006801:Humans; D008099:Liver / Q000098:blood supply / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D008113:Liver Neoplasms / Q000098:blood supply* / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000628:therapy; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011169:Portal Vein / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*
Acquisition protocol; Arterial phase; Liver CT; Radioembolisation; SIRT