LI-RADS : concordance between energy-integrating computed tomography, photon-counting detector computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging
| dc.contributor.author | Müller, Lukas | |
| dc.contributor.author | Jorg, Tobias | |
| dc.contributor.author | Stoehr, Fabian | |
| dc.contributor.author | Grunz, Jan-Peter | |
| dc.contributor.author | Graafen, Dirk | |
| dc.contributor.author | Halfmann, Moritz C. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Huflage, Henner | |
| dc.contributor.author | Foerster, Friedrich | |
| dc.contributor.author | Mittler, Jens | |
| dc.contributor.author | Pinto dos Santos, Daniel | |
| dc.contributor.author | Bäuerle, Tobias | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kloeckner, Roman | |
| dc.contributor.author | Emrich, Tilman | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-12-08T16:07:34Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Background Photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT) offers technical advantages over energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) for liver imaging. However, it is unclear whether these translate into clinical improvements regarding the classification of suspicious liver lesions using the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS). This study compared the intra- and intermodal agreement of EID-CT and PCD-CT with Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for liver lesion classification. Methods This retrospective study included patients who underwent EID-CT or PCD-CT and MRI within 30 days between 02/2023 and 01/2024. Three board-certified radiologists assessed LI-RADS classification and presence of LI-RADS major features. Fleiss’ Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to evaluate rater agreement. Results Sixty-eight lesions in 26 patients (mean age 65.0 ± 14.2 years, 19 [73.1%] male) were analyzed. Intramodal inter-rater agreement for LI-RADS classification was 0.88 (0.62–0.88) for EID-CT, 0.90 (0.83–0.94) for PCD-CT, and 0.87 (0.81–0.91) for MRI. Agreement in PCD-CT was substantial for all LI-RADS major features, whereas in EID-CT only for washout. Intermodal agreement between CT and MRI ranged from 0.67 to 0.72. Final intermodal LI-RADS classification agreement was higher for PCD-CT (0.72–0.85) than EID-CT (0.52–0.64). Conclusions PCD-CT demonstrated higher intermodal and intramodal agreement for LI-RADS classification and major features than EID-CT. Additionally, PCD-CT shows significantly higher intramodal and inter-rater agreement for LI-RADS classification and greater concordance with MRI compared to EID-CT, reaching substantial to almost perfect agreement. These results suggest a potential benefit of PCD-CT in the management and treatment decision-making of HCC. | en |
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-13852 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/13873 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | |
| dc.rights | CC-BY-4.0 | |
| dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | |
| dc.subject.ddc | 610 Medizin | de |
| dc.subject.ddc | 610 Medical sciences | en |
| dc.title | LI-RADS : concordance between energy-integrating computed tomography, photon-counting detector computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging | en |
| dc.type | Zeitschriftenaufsatz | |
| jgu.identifier.uuid | a6635db0-c6e8-43eb-81eb-49f1c92da5cb | |
| jgu.journal.title | Cancer imaging | |
| jgu.journal.volume | 25 | |
| jgu.organisation.department | FB 04 Medizin | |
| jgu.organisation.name | Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz | |
| jgu.organisation.number | 2700 | |
| jgu.organisation.place | Mainz | |
| jgu.organisation.ror | https://ror.org/023b0x485 | |
| jgu.pages.alternative | 99 | |
| jgu.publisher.doi | 10.1186/s40644-025-00922-9 | |
| jgu.publisher.eissn | 1470-7330 | |
| jgu.publisher.name | Biomed Central | |
| jgu.publisher.place | London | |
| jgu.publisher.year | 2025 | |
| jgu.rights.accessrights | openAccess | |
| jgu.subject.ddccode | 610 | |
| jgu.subject.dfg | Lebenswissenschaften | |
| jgu.type.dinitype | Article | en_GB |
| jgu.type.resource | Text | |
| jgu.type.version | Published version |