Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
IMAGING OF INCIDENTAL ADRENAL LESIONS: PRINCIPLES, TECHNIQUES AND ALGORITHMS Giles W.L. Boland Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard Medical School Objectives • Comprehensive overview of adrenal imaging • Basic principles • Techniques (CT, MRI, PET/CT) • Algorithms Why characterize lesions? • Most adrenal lesions detected by CT • 2-7% of CT’s depending on age • Almost always benign in the non-oncology patient • Song et al. 973 patients without cancer none had malignant masses (AJR 2008) • Further characterization needed in a patient with cancer - up to 50% lesions metastatic Which is metastatic? LUNG CANCER No adrenal metastases Primary lesion can be surgically removed and curative therapy performed LUNG CANCER Adrenal metastasis Lung lesion now inoperable and palliative therapy performed Principles • • • • • • Why it’s important to characterize lesions Macroscopic features Serial Imaging Lipid sensitive techniques (CT and MRI) Physiologic techniques (CT washouts) Functional techniques (PET and PET/CT) Principles: lesion morphology Size lesions > 4 cm tend to be metastases or carcinoma Lesion morphology Shape irregular shape often malignant (but not always) Lesion morphology Lesion heterogeneity inhomogeneous - often malignant homogeneous - indeterminate Change in lesion size • Use cheapest radiological test: “the old film” - prior CT • No change: adenoma • Increase in size: metastasis 2001 1996 Metastatic disease 2008 2009 Serial imaging - lymphoma 2005 2007 2008 Serial imaging - hematoma 2007 2008 Morphologic features • • • • • Usually not helpful Better tests needed to avoid biopsy Needs high specificity Sensitivity less important but adequate Ideally serial imaging not required LESION CHARACTERIZATION • Test devised to confidently diagnose adenomas • Reduces # of percutaneous biopsies • Curative therapy for primary tumor possible TEST SPECIFICITY: ADENOMA • SPECIFICITY needs to be close to 100% • Non-specific: curative surgery will be performed for primary malignant lesion when adrenal metastases is present TEST SENSITIVITY: ADENOMA • SENSITIVITY less crucial • Lesion remains indeterminate and therefore biopsy/MRI performed and adenoma confirmed Lipid sensitive techniques • Based on lipid content of detected lesion • Abundant intracytoplasmic fat in adrenal cortex (both functioning and nonfunctioning adenomas) - cholesterol, fatty acids neutral fat • Metastases lipid poor • CT and MRI Macroscopic fat - myelolipoma Lipid sensitive techniques • • • • 70% adenomas lipid-rich 30% lipid-poor lesions All metastases are lipid-poor Lipid-poor adenomas and mets are therefore indeterminate • These lesions require further characterization (follow-up, washouts, PET, biopsy) Lipid sensitive CT • • • • • Non-contrast CT Place ROI on lesion Lee et al 1991 38 adenomas: -2.2 HU 28 metastases: 29 HU HU 0 2 4 8 Sensitivity 41 47 55 65 Specificity 100 100 99 98.5 10 71 98 12 18 73 86 97 88 Boland et al. AJR 1998 Region of interest 38 HU 46 HU 6 HU MRI • Chemical Shift Imaging • Fat protons precess < water • Equal proportion within voxel = zero signal • Detects same tissue as CT (i.e. fat) • In theory offers no advantages • Longer test • Less availability Lipid-Rich Adenoma In-phase Out-of-phase Lipid-poor metastasis In-phase Out-of-phase Chemical shift – voxel water/fat ratio CT In-phase Out-of-phase Contrast-enhanced CT • Adrenals enhance • Metastases tend to enhance to a higher HU than adenomas • HU measurements meaningless on dynamic study • Too much cross-over of HU values between benign and malignant lesions Perfusion Imaging: CT Washouts • Adenomas washout faster than metastases • Even lipid poor adenomas washout faster • Delayed CT • Ratio of enhanced to delayed HU • Disrupt busy CT schedule • Better for patient in one sitting Korobkin AJR 1998 • Relative % washout • Absolute % washout • Rule of thumb • Adenomas washout > 40% (> 60% absolute) • Non-adenomas < 40% (> 60% absolute) Washout • Absolute: Enhanced - Delayed x 100% Enhanced - Unenhanced • Relative: Enhanced - Delayed Enhanced x 100% Lipid Poor Adenomas: Caoili et al. Radiology 2002 • • • • • • 127 adenomas: 39 non-adenomas 22 lipid poor Adrenal protocol Characterize 19/22 masses as benign 124/127 adenomas characterized by CT Other masses had additional features to suggest adenoma Blake et al. Radiology 2005 • • • • • • MDCT 122 masses 10 minute delay RPW threshold 38% 100/98% sensitivity/specificity All malignant lesions RPW < 40% Metabolic Imaging • • • • • PET Metabolically hyperactive cells trap FDG Used since early 1990’s Now in favor due to PET/CT How useful? Metastasis Visual, SUV and SUR • RSNA 2008 (Jagtiani et al) • Meta-analysis 15 reports • 878 adrenal lesions (457 benign and 421 malignant lesions) in 763 patients • 10 PET stand-alone, 5 PET/CT scanners • Visual as effective as SUR/SUV Uptake < liver = benign Uptake = liver = benign Uptake slightly > liver = indeterminate Uptake >> liver = malignant Adrenal algorithm • Non contrast CT: < 10 HU > 10 HU STOP Washouts • Washouts: Absolute: > 60% < 60% > 40% < 40% Adenoma Mets Adenoma Mets Relative: • 10 versus 15 minutes delays? Best Test • • • • • PET/CT Combines functional PET with anatomy Even better with washouts Multiple reports > 95% accuracy Which test? • • • • • • • • No test has a monopoly Non-contrast CT effective for adenoma CT washouts with CT protocol Can stop there Will be some indeterminate lesions Suspicious lesions PET/CT increasingly common Few lesions will need biopsy THANK YOU! Radiology 2008;249:756-77 Incidental Adrenal Lesions: Principles, Techniques, and Algorithms for Imaging Characterization