RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Quantitative differentiation of minimal-fat angiomyolipomas from renal cell carcinomas using grating-based x-ray phase-contrast computed tomography: an ex vivo study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.12.06.22283181
DO 10.1101/2022.12.06.22283181
A1 Birnbacher, Lorenz
A1 Braunagel, Margarita
A1 Willner, Marian
A1 Marschner, Mathias
A1 De Marco, Fabio
A1 Viermetz, Manuel
A1 Auweter, Sigrid
A1 Notohamiprodjo, Susan
A1 Hellbach, Katharina
A1 Notohamiprodjo, Mike
A1 Staehler, Michael
A1 Pfeiffer, Daniela
A1 Reiser, Maximilian F.
A1 Pfeiffer, Franz
A1 Herzen, Julia
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/07/2022.12.06.22283181.abstract
AB Background The differentiation of minimal-fat—or low-fat—angiomyolipomas from other renal lesions is clinically challenging in conventional computed tomography. In this work, we have assessed the potential of grating-based x-ray phase-contrast computed tomography (GBPC-CT) for visualization and quantitative differentiation of minimal-fat angiomyolipomas (mfAMLs) and oncocytomas from renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) on ex vivo renal samples.Materials and methods Laboratory GBPC-CT was performed at 40 kVp on 28 ex vivo kidney specimens including five angiomyolipomas with three minimal-fat (mfAMLs) and two high-fat (hfAMLs) subtypes as well as three oncocytomas and 20 RCCs with eight clear cell (ccRCCs), seven papillary (pRCCs) and five chromophobe RCC (chrRCC) subtypes. Quantitative values of conventional Hounsfield units (HU) and phase-contrast Hounsfield units (HUp) were determined and histogram analysis was performed on GBPC-CT and grating-based attenuation-contrast computed tomography (GBAC-CT) slices for each specimen. For comparison, the same specimens were imaged at a 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner.Results We have successfully matched GBPC-CT images with clinical MRI and histology, as GBPC-CT presented with increased soft tissue contrast compared to absorption-based images. GBPC-CT images revealed a significant (p<0.05) difference between mfAML samples (58±4 HUp), hfAML (−58±17 HUp) and RCCs (ccRCCs: 40±12 HUp; pRCCs: 43±9 HUp; chrRCCs: 40±7 HUp) in contrast to corresponding laboratory attenuation-contrast CT and clinical MRI. Due to the heterogeneity and lower signal of oncocytomas (44±10 HUp), quantitative differentiation of the samples based on HUp or in combination with HUs was not possible.Conclusions GBPC-CT allows quantitative differentiation of minimal-fat angiomyolipomas from oncocytomas and RCCs in contrast to absorption-based imaging and clinical MRI.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementFP: European Research Council (ERC, H2020, AdG 695045) https://erc.easme-web.eu/?p=695045 FP: Deutsche Forschungsgesellschaft (DFG, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz-Programm 2011) https://www.dfg.de/gefoerderte_projekte/wissenschaftliche_preise/leibniz-preis/2011/ FP & MFR: Deutsche Forschungsgesellschaft (DFG, Cluster of Excellence Munich-Centre for Advanced Photonics MAP, EXC158) https://karten.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/24819222Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This retrospective experimental ex vivo study was approved by the local ethics committee (Ethikkomission der Universität München, Munich) and carried out in accordance with the International Declaration of Helsinki.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll relevant data are within the manuscript.