Comparison of US and unenhanced multi-detector row CT in patients suspected of having acute appendicitis.

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic performance of ultrasonography (US) and unenhanced multi-detector row computed tomography (CT) in patients suspected of having acute appendicitis by using surgery or clinical follow-up as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved the research protocol. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients or, for those who were adolescents, from their parents. Ninety-four patients (59 female and 35 male patients) aged 16-81 years (mean, 38 years) who were suspected of having acute appendicitis underwent both US and unenhanced multi-detector row CT of the entire abdomen. The examinations were performed within 1-2 hours of each other. US and CT images were obtained and prospectively interpreted by a different radiologist from a group of abdominal radiologists or a group of residents and general radiologists. Radiologists proposed an overall diagnosis and an alternative diagnosis. Data from US and CT were compared, and the definite diagnosis was established with surgical findings (n = 40) or results of clinical follow-up (n = 54) as the reference standard. Comparisons were made for each group of radiologists and the patient's age, body mass index (BMI), and sex. Proportion comparisons were made by using the Pearson chi2 test or the Fisher exact test. Continuous variables were compared between groups with the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Thirty patients had definite appendicitis. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were not significantly different between US and CT or between groups of radiologists (P values ranged from .389 to >.99), regardless of the patient's BMI (P values ranged from .073 to >.99). Misclassifications were compared with the definite alternative diagnosis and were not significantly different between US and CT or between groups of radiologists (P = .061-.592), regardless of patient age (P = .875) or sex (P = .151 and >.99 for male and female patients, respectively). The frequency of inconclusive examinations, however, was significantly higher with US than with CT, regardless of radiologist experience (P = .020 and <.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although the diagnostic performances of US and multi-detector row CT are comparable, more inconclusive images were obtained with US.

Acute appendicitis: comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT.

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare low- and standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row computed tomography (CT) in patients suspected of having acute appendicitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-five consecutive patients underwent two unenhanced multi-detector row CT examinations with 4 x 2.5-mm collimation, 120 kVp, and 30 and 100 effective mAs. Two radiologists independently read the images obtained at each dose during two sessions. Readers recorded visualization of the appendix and presence of gas in its lumen, appendicolith, periappendiceal fat stranding, cecal wall thickening, and abscess or phlegmon to measure the diameter of the appendix and to propose diagnosis (appendicitis or alternative). Data were compared according to dose and reader, with definite diagnosis established on basis of surgical findings (n = 37) or clinical follow-up. chi(2) tests and logistic regression were used. Measurement agreements were assessed with Cohen kappa statistics. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients had a definite diagnosis of appendicitis. No difference was observed between the frequency of visualization of the appendix (P =.874) neither in its mean diameter (P =.101-.696, according to readers and sessions) nor in the readers' overall diagnosis (P =.788) at each dose. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of each sign were not different between doses. Fat stranding, appendicolith, and diameter were the most predictive signs, regardless of dose, yielding approximately 90% of correct diagnoses. The ability to propose a correct alternative diagnosis was not influenced by the dose. CONCLUSION: Low-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT has similar diagnostic performance as standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

[F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as a tool for early recognition of incomplete tumor destruction after radiofrequency ablation for liver metastases.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To assess the value of FDG positron emission tomography (PET) for early detection of incomplete tumor destruction after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for liver metastasis. METHODS: Twenty-eight unresectable liver metastases in 17 patients were treated by RFA. Patients underwent computed tomography (CT) and FDG-PET preoperatively, at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively. Postoperative CT and FDG-PET at 1 week and 1 month were analyzed to identify hypervascular and hypermetabolic residual tumors at the RFA site. These results were correlated with follow-up CT and, in case of reintervention, with pathologic results. RESULTS: In 24/28 of RFA-treated metastases, CT and FDG-PET at 1 week and 1 month showed no tumor residues. During follow-up, none of these 13 patients developed local recurrence at RFA site. In four patients, FDG-PET at 1 week and 1 month showed peripheral hypermetabolic residue after RFA, whereas CT did not revealed residual tumor. In three patients, local persistence of viable tumor cells was biopsy-proven at reintervention. In the fourth, follow-up CT showed subsequent development of a local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET accurately monitors the local efficacy of RFA for treatment of liver metastases, as it early recognizes incomplete tumor ablation, not detectable on CT.

Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with computed tomography (CT) in assessing acute pancreatitis (AP) and to explore the correlation between MRI findings and clinical outcome. METHODS: Patients with AP were investigated by contrast-enhanced CT and MRI on admission and 7 and 30 days thereafter. MRI was performed with intravenous secretin and contrast medium. Balthazar's grading system was used to measure CT and MRI severity indices (CTSI and MRSI, respectively). RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients (median age, 47 years; range, 15-86) were studied. AP was of biliary etiology in 19 patients (49%). On admission, AP was assessed clinically as severe in 7 patients (18%). A strong correlation was demonstrated between CTSI and MRSI on admission and 7 days later. MRSI on admission correlated with the following: the Ranson score, C-reactive protein levels 48 hours after admission, duration of hospitalization, and clinical outcome regarding morbidity, including local and systemic complications. Considering the Ranson score as the gold standard, MRI detected severe AP with 83% (58-96, 95% CI) sensitivity, 91% (68-98) specificity vs. 78% (52-93) and 86% (63-96) for CT. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography after i.v. secretin injection showed pancreatic duct leakage in 3 patients (8%). CONCLUSIONS: MRI is a reliable method of staging AP severity, has predictive value for the prognosis of the disease, and has fewer contraindications than CT. It can also detect pancreatic duct disruption, which may occur early in the course of AP.

New considerations for an overall approach to treat hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients.

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of cases and organ shortage justify reconsidering the global therapeutic approach for hepatocelluar carcinoma in cirrhotic patients. METHODS: Recent literature was reviewed, focused on new therapeutic technologies such as radiofrequency. RESULTS: For small tumors, liver transplantation offers theoretically the best chance for cure. However, organ shortage may eliminate this advantage, because of tumor progression while waiting for a graft. For small tumors, arising on compensated cirrhosis, resection or radiofrequency ablation may provide efficient local tumor control without precluding subsequent transplantation in case of tumor recurrence and/or cirrhosis decompensation. CONCLUSIONS: For small tumors and compensated cirrhosis, resection or radiofrequency could represent acceptable first line treatments. In addition to permit safe and immediate tumor control, this strategy would allow a preferential redistribution of grafts to patients with decompensated cirrhosis in whom transplantation is the only possibility.