Advertisement

Journal of Digital Imaging

, Volume 22, Issue 5, pp 437–448 | Cite as

Optimization of Perfusion CT Protocol for Imaging of Extracranial Head and Neck Tumors

  • Sotirios Bisdas
  • Chuan Zhi Foo
  • Choon Hua Thng
  • Thomas J. Vogl
  • Tong San Koh
Article

Abstract

The in vivo assessment of physiological processes associated with microcirculation in the head and neck tissue by means of perfusion computed tomography is widely used in the management of patients with head and neck tumors. However, there is no systematic consideration of the total acquisition duration and placement of the scans. A simulation study for optimizing perfusion studies of extracranial head and neck tumors, with considerations of reducing radiation dose while maintaining accuracy of the perfusion parameters, is demonstrated here. The suggested that dual-phase optimized protocols may provide reliable estimations of the permeability surface area product as well as blood flow and volume without additional radiation burden and serious patient discomfort. These optimized protocols can potentially be useful in the clinical setting of examining patients with extracranial head and neck tumors.

Key words

Perfusion CT blood flow blood volume permeability surface-area product head and neck 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge support from the Singapore Cancer Syndicate (SCS-CS-0072).

References

  1. 1.
    Lee TY: Functional CT: physiological models. Trends Biotech 20:S3–S10, 2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miles KA: Functional computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 38:2079–2084, 2002Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al: Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI of a diffusible tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. JMRI 10:223–232, 1999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sobol WT, Cure JK: Can in vivo assessment of tissue hemodynamics with dynamic contrast-enhanced CT be used in the diagnosis of tumors and monitoring of cancer therapy outcomes. Radiology 232:631–632, 2004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roberts HC, Roberts TPL, Bollen AW, et al: Correlation of microvascular permeability derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging with histologic grade and tumor labeling index: a study in human brain tumors. Acad Radiol 8:384–391, 2001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lüdemann L, Grieger W, Wurm R, et al: Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with WHO tumor grading for gliomas. Eur Radiol 11:1231–1241, 2001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mayr NA, Hawighorst H, Yuh WTC, et al: MR microcirculation assessment in cervical cancer: correlations with histomorphological tumor markers and clinical outcome. JMRI 10:267–276, 1999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bisdas S, Baghi M, Smolarz A, et al: Quantitative measurements of perfusion and permeability of oropharyngeal and oral cavity cancer, recurrent disease, and associated lymph nodes using dynamic first pass contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Invest Radiol 42:172–179, 2007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rumboldt Z, Al-Okaili R, Deveikis JP: Perfusion CT for head and neck tumors: pilot study. Am J Neuroradiol 26:1178–1185, 2005PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gandhi D, Hoeffner EG, Carlos RC, et al: Computed tomography perfusion of squamous cell carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract. Initial results. J Comput Assist Tomogr 27:687–693, 2003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goh V, Halligan S, Hugill JA, et al: Quantitative colorectal cancer perfusion measurement using dynamic contrast-enhanced, multidetector-row computed tomography: effect of acquisition time and implications for protocols. J Comput Assist Tomogr 29:59–63, 2005PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cenic A, Nabavi DG, Craen RA, et al: A CT method to measure hemodynamics in brain tumors: validation and application of cerebral blood flow maps. Am J Neuradiol 21:462–470, 2000Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brix G, Kiessling F, Lucht R, et al: Microcirculation and microvasculature in breast tumors: pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR image series. Magn Reson Med 52:420–429, 2004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cheong LHD, Lim CCT, Koh TS: Dynamic contrast-enhanced CT of intracranial meningioma: comparison of distributed and compartmental tracer kinetic models—initial results. Radiology 232:921–930, 2004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ostergaard L, Weisskoff RM, Chesler DA, et al: High resolution measurement of cerebral blood flow using intravascular tracer bolus passages. Part I: Mathematical approach and statistical analysis. Magn Reson Med 36:715–725, 1996PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Calamante F, Cadian D, Connelly A: Quantification of perfusion using bolus tracking magnetic resonance imaging in stroke: assumptions, limitations and potential implications for clinical use. Stroke 3:1146–1151, 2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hirata M, Sugawara Y, Murase K, et al: Evaluation of optimal scan duration and end time in cerebral CT perfusion study. Radiat Med 23:351–363, 2005PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kalra MK, Small WC, Torres WE: A 45-second CT perfusion protocol for rectal cancers may not be adequate to infer vascular permeability-surface area products. Radiology 238:755–756, 2006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Murase K, Nanjo T, Li S, et al: Effect of X-ray tube current on the accuracy of cerebral perfusion parameters obtained by CT perfusion studies. Phys Med Biol 50:5019–5029, 2005PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fukumura D, Yuan F, Monsky WL, Chen Y, Jain RK: Effect of host microenvironment on the microcirculation of human colon adenocarcinoma. Am J Pathol 151:679–688, 1997PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hermans R, Meijerink M, Van den Bogaert W: Tumor perfusion rate determined noninvasively by dynamic computed tomography predicts outcome in head-and-neck cancer after radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57:1351–1356, 2003PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Siegel MJ, Schmidt B, Bradley D, Suess C, Hildebolt C: Radiation dose and image quality in pediatric CT: effect of technical factors and phantom size and shape. Radiology 233:515–522, 2004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hamberg LM, Rhea JT, Hunter GJ, et al: Multi-detector row CT: radiation dose characteristics. Radiology 226:762–772, 2003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    European Guidelines on Quality Criteria for Computed Tomography (EUR 16262 EN, May 1999). Available at: www.drs.dk/guidelines/ct/quality/index.htm. Accessed February 2008
  25. 25.
    Goh V, Halligan S, Bartram CI: Quantitative tumor perfusion assessment with multidetector CT: are measurements from two commercial software packages interchangeable. Radiology 242:777–782, 2007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sotirios Bisdas
    • 1
  • Chuan Zhi Foo
    • 2
  • Choon Hua Thng
    • 2
  • Thomas J. Vogl
    • 1
  • Tong San Koh
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional RadiologyJohann Wolfgang Goethe University HospitalFrankfurtGermany
  2. 2.Department of Oncologic ImagingNational Cancer CenterSingaporeSingapore
  3. 3.School of Electrical and Electronic EngineeringNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations