We have located links that may give you full text access.
Differentiation between pancreatic metastases from renal cell carcinoma and hypervascular neuroendocrine tumour: Use of relative percentage washout value and its clinical implication.
European Journal of Radiology 2015 November
PURPOSE: To compare computed tomography (CT) findings in patients with pancreatic metastasis from renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) and patients with hypervascular pancreatic neuroendocrine tumour (pNET) with a focus on the relative percentage washout (RPW).
METHODS: We evaluated 16 patients with 37 pRCCs and 28 patients with 31 hypervascular pNETs using a protocol consisting of arterial and portal phase CT. Imaging findings were analyzed for comparison between the two groups. The RPW of each tumour using biphasic CT was obtained by two observers for evaluation of diagnostic performance. Interobserver agreement of each value and optimal cut-off level of RPW for discrimination between groups were evaluated.
RESULTS: Tumour multiplicity showed significant difference in both groups. The mean RPW of the pRCC group (observer 1, 27.0%; observer 2, 29.4%) was significantly higher than that of the pNET group (observer 1, 0.5%; observer 2, 3.2%) (p<0.001 for each observer). Interobserver agreement for both attenuation values and RPWs was excellent. A RPW value of 19% was selected as the optimal cut-off for pRCC determination, and showed good performance (accuracy 83.8%, sensitivity 83.8%, and specificity 83.9%).
CONCLUSION: With multiplicity, RPW of the tumour on CT could be helpful for differentiating pRCCs from hypervascular pNETs.
METHODS: We evaluated 16 patients with 37 pRCCs and 28 patients with 31 hypervascular pNETs using a protocol consisting of arterial and portal phase CT. Imaging findings were analyzed for comparison between the two groups. The RPW of each tumour using biphasic CT was obtained by two observers for evaluation of diagnostic performance. Interobserver agreement of each value and optimal cut-off level of RPW for discrimination between groups were evaluated.
RESULTS: Tumour multiplicity showed significant difference in both groups. The mean RPW of the pRCC group (observer 1, 27.0%; observer 2, 29.4%) was significantly higher than that of the pNET group (observer 1, 0.5%; observer 2, 3.2%) (p<0.001 for each observer). Interobserver agreement for both attenuation values and RPWs was excellent. A RPW value of 19% was selected as the optimal cut-off for pRCC determination, and showed good performance (accuracy 83.8%, sensitivity 83.8%, and specificity 83.9%).
CONCLUSION: With multiplicity, RPW of the tumour on CT could be helpful for differentiating pRCCs from hypervascular pNETs.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app