Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak (michal.masternak@ucf.edu) for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 25, Number 2, 2020

Feasibility of 4D CT simulation with synchronized intravenous contrast injection in hepatocellular carcinoma

Anil Gupta, Rishabh Kumar, Hanuman Prasad Yadav, Manik Sharma, Rose Kamal, Deepak Thaper, Prabir Banik, Shipra Gupta, Kartik Saroha, Sandeep Singh, Shiv Kumar Sarin

Summary:

Background Delivering Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is challenging mainly for two reasons: first, motion of the liver occurs in six degrees of freedom and, second, delineation of the tumor is difficult owing to a similar density of HCC to that of the adjoining healthy liver tissue in a non-contrast CT scan. To overcome both these challenges simultaneously, we performed a feasibility study to synchronize intravenous contrast to obtain an arterial and a delayed phase 4D CT. Materials and Methods We included seven HCC patients of planned for SBRT. 4D CT simulation was performed with synchronized intravenous contrast based on the formula TSCAN DELAY = Tpeak – (L0/Detector Coverage × Cine Duration in Seconds). This was followed by a delayed 4D CT scan. Results We found that, with our protocol, it is feasible to obtain a 4DCT with an arterial and a delayed phase making it comparable to a diagnostic multi-phase CT. The peak HU of the 4D scan and diagnostic CT were similar (mean peak HU 134.2 vs 143.1, p value = 0.58 N.S). Whereas in comparison with a non-contrast CT a significant rise in the peak HU was seen (mean peak 134.2 vs 61.4 p value = .00003). Conclusion A synchronized contrast 4D CT simulation for HCC is safe and feasible. It results in good contrast enhancement comparable to a diagnostic 3D contrast CT scan.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2020; 25(2) : 293-298


« back

 
INDEXED IN:

Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/15071367/19/2