Höink Anna Janina, Schülke Christoph, Koch Raphael, Löhnert Annika, Kammerer Sara, Fortkamp Rasmus, Heindel Walter, Buerke Boris
Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Germany.
Department of Clinical Radiology, University Hospital Münster (UKM), Münster, Germany.
Rofo. 2017 Nov;189(11):1067-1075. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-116220. Epub 2017 Aug 23.
To compare measurement precision and interobserver variability in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver metastases in MSCT before and after transarterial local ablative therapies. Retrospective study of 72 patients with malignant liver lesions (42 metastases; 30 HCCs) before and after therapy (43 SIRT procedures; 29 TACE procedures). Established (LAD; SAD; WHO) and vitality-based parameters (mRECIST; mLAD; mSAD; EASL) were assessed manually and semi-automatically by two readers. The relative interobserver difference (RID) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated. The median RID for vitality-based parameters was lower from semi-automatic than from manual measurement of mLAD (manual 12.5 %; semi-automatic 3.4 %), mSAD (manual 12.7 %; semi-automatic 5.7 %) and EASL (manual 10.4 %; semi-automatic 1.8 %). The difference in established parameters was not statistically noticeable (p > 0.05). The ICCs of LAD (manual 0.984; semi-automatic 0.982), SAD (manual 0.975; semi-automatic 0.958) and WHO (manual 0.984; semi-automatic 0.978) are high, both in manual and semi-automatic measurements. The ICCs of manual measurements of mLAD (0.897), mSAD (0.844) and EASL (0.875) are lower. This decrease cannot be found in semi-automatic measurements of mLAD (0.997), mSAD (0.992) and EASL (0.998). Vitality-based tumor measurements of HCC and metastases after transarterial local therapies should be performed semi-automatically due to greater measurement precision, thus increasing the reproducibility and in turn the reliability of therapeutic decisions. · Liver lesion measurements according to EASL and mRECIST are more precise when performed semi-automatically.. · The higher reproducibility may facilitate a more reliable classification of therapy response.. · Measurements according to RECIST and WHO offer equivalent precision semi-automatically and manually.. · Höink AJ, Schülke C, Koch R et al. Response Evaluation of Malignant Liver Lesions After TACE/SIRT: Comparison of Manual and Semi-Automatic Measurement of Different Response Criteria in Multislice CT. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2017; 189: 1067 - 1075.
比较经动脉局部消融治疗前后多层螺旋CT(MSCT)评估肝细胞癌(HCC)和肝转移瘤时的测量精度及观察者间变异性。对72例恶性肝病变患者(42例转移瘤;30例HCC)治疗前后(43例选择性内放射治疗[SIRT];29例经动脉化疗栓塞术[TACE])进行回顾性研究。由两名阅片者手动和半自动评估既定参数(最大直径[LAD]、短径[SAD]、世界卫生组织[WHO]标准)和基于活力的参数(改良实体瘤疗效评价标准[mRECIST]、改良最大直径[mLAD]、改良短径[mSAD]、欧洲肝脏研究学会[EASL]标准)。计算相对观察者间差异(RID)和组内相关系数(ICC)。基于活力的参数的中位RID,半自动测量时低于手动测量,mLAD(手动测量为12.5%;半自动测量为3.4%)、mSAD(手动测量为12.7%;半自动测量为5.7%)和EASL(手动测量为10.4%;半自动测量为1.8%)。既定参数的差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。LAD(手动测量ICC为0.984;半自动测量ICC为0.982)、SAD(手动测量ICC为0.975;半自动测量ICC为0.958)和WHO标准(手动测量ICC为0.984;半自动测量ICC为0.978)的ICC值在手动和半自动测量中均较高。mLAD(0.897)、mSAD(0.844)和EASL(0.875)手动测量的ICC值较低。在mLAD(0.997)、mSAD(0.992)和EASL(0.998)的半自动测量中未发现这种降低。由于测量精度更高,经动脉局部治疗后HCC和转移瘤基于活力的肿瘤测量应采用半自动方式进行,从而提高可重复性,进而提高治疗决策的可靠性。· 根据EASL和mRECIST进行的肝脏病变测量采用半自动方式时更精确。· 更高的可重复性可能有助于更可靠地分类治疗反应。· 根据RECIST和WHO标准进行的测量在半自动和手动测量中具有同等精度。· Höink AJ, Schülke C, Koch R等。TACE/SIRT术后恶性肝病变的反应评估:多层螺旋CT中不同反应标准的手动与半自动测量比较。《德国放射学杂志》2017年;189:1067 - 1075。