Assessing Vascularity of Osseous Spinal Metastases with Dual-Energy CT-DSA: A Pilot Study Compared with Catheter Angiography

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   2. Mut M,
   3. Schiff D,
   4. Shaffrey ME

   . Metastasis to nervous system: spinal epidural and intramedullary metastases. J Neurooncol 2005;75:43–56 doi:10.1007/s11060-004-8097-2 pmid:16215815

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   2. Gilbert RW,
   3. Kim JH,
   4. Posner JB

   . Epidural spinal cord compression from metastatic tumor: diagnosis and treatment. Ann Neurol 1978;3:40–51 doi:10.1002/ana.410030107 pmid:655653

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   2. de Ruiter GC,
   3. Nogarede CO,
   4. Wolfs JF, et al

   . Quality of life after different surgical procedures for the treatment of spinal metastases: results of a single-center prospective case series. Neurosurg Focus 2017;42:E17 doi:10.3171/2016.6.FOCUS16150 pmid:28041330

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   2. Robial N,
   3. Charles YP,
   4. Bogorin I, et al

   . Is preoperative embolization a prerequisite for spinal metastases surgical management? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2012;98:536–42 doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2012.03.008 pmid:22809704

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   2. Pazionis TJ,
   3. Papanastassiou ID,
   4. Maybody M, et al

   . Embolization of hypervascular bone metastases reduces intraoperative blood loss: a case-control study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014;472:3179–87 doi:10.1007/s11999-014-3734-3 pmid:24964883

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Kickuth R,
   3. Waldherr C,
   4. Hoppe H, et al

   . Interventional management of hypervascular osseous metastasis: role of embolotherapy before orthopedic tumor resection and bone stabilization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191:W240–47 doi:10.2214/AJR.07.4037 pmid:19020210

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   2. McDonald K,
   3. Murphy LE,
   4. Eames N

   . Is it necessary to embolise all spinal metastases from primary renal tumours? J Orthop 2016;13:472–74 doi:10.1016/j.jor.2015.12.002 pmid:27857484

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Qiao Z,
   3. Jia N,
   4. He Q

   . Does preoperative transarterial embolization decrease blood loss during spine tumor surgery? Interv Neuroradiol 2015;21:129–35 doi:10.15274/INR-2014-10091 pmid:25934787

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   2. Mendel E,
   3. Bourekas E,
   4. Gerszten P, et al

   . Percutaneous techniques in the treatment of spine tumors: what are the diagnostic and therapeutic indications and outcomes? Spine 2009;34:S93–100 doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b77895 pmid:19829281

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    2. Schmidt R,
    3. Rupp-Heim G,
    4. Dammann F, et al

    . Surgical therapy of vertebral metastases: are there predictive parameters for intraoperative excessive blood loss despite preoperative embolization? Tumori 2011;97:66–73 doi:10.1177/030089161109700113 pmid:21528667

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    2. Mauch JT,
    3. Carr CM,
    4. Cloft H, et al

    . Review of the imaging features of benign osteoporotic and malignant vertebral compression fractures. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018;39:1584–92 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5528 pmid:29348133

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    2. Jeong D,
    3. Bui M,
    4. Peterson D, et al

    . FDG avid breast cancer bone metastases silent on CT and scintigraphy: a case report with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Acta Radiol Open 2017;6:2058460117734243 doi:10.1177/2058460117734243 pmid:29051834

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Al-Muqbel KM

    . Bone marrow metastasis is an early stage of bone metastasis in breast cancer detected clinically by F18-FDG-PET/CT imaging. Biomed Res Int 2017;2017:9852632 doi:10.1155/2017/9852632 pmid:28884133

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Gondim Teixeira PA,
    3. Hossu G,
    4. Lecocq S, et al

    . Bone marrow edema pattern identification in patients with lytic bone lesions using digital subtraction angiography-like bone subtraction on large-area detector computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2014;49:156–64 doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000007 pmid:24220254

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Gondim Teixeira PA,
    3. Gervaise A,
    4. Louis M, et al

    . Musculoskeletal wide detector CT: principles, techniques and applications in clinical practice and research. Eur J Radiol 2015;84:892–900 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.12.033 pmid:25656096

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    2. Nishii T,
    3. Kono AK,
    4. Nishio M, et al

    . Bone-subtracted spinal CT angiography using nonrigid registration for better visualization of arterial feeders in spinal arteriovenous fistulas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:2400–06 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4435 pmid:26251431

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    2. Yu L,
    3. Christner JA,
    4. Leng S, et al

    . Virtual monochromatic imaging in dual-source dual-energy CT: radiation dose and image quality. Med Phys 2011;38:6371–79 doi:10.1118/1.3658568 pmid:22149820

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Hayton A,
    3. Wallace A,
    4. Marks P, et al

    . Australian diagnostic reference levels for multi detector computed tomography. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 2013;36:19–26 doi:10.1007/s13246-013-0180-6 pmid:23307142

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    Directorate-General for Energy, Directorate D, Nuclear Safety and Fuel Cycle, Unit D3, Radiation Protection. RADIATION PROTECTION No. 180 Diagnostic Reference Levels in Thirty-six European Countries (Part 2). European Commission; 2014. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/RP180%20part2.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2018.
20. 20.↵
    2. Takase K,
    3. Sawamura Y,
    4. Igarashi K, et al

    . Demonstration of the artery of Adamkiewicz at multi-detector row helical CT. Radiology 2002;223:39–45 doi:10.1148/radiol.2231010513 pmid:11930046

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    2. Kudo K,
    3. Terae S,
    4. Asano T, et al

    . Anterior spinal artery and artery of Adamkiewicz detected by using multi-detector row CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003;24:13–17 pmid:12533320

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    2. Yoshioka K,
    3. Tanaka R,
    4. Takagi H, et al

    . Ultra-high-resolution CT angiography of the artery of Adamkiewicz: a feasibility study. Neuroradiology 2018;60:109–15 doi:10.1007/s00234-017-1927-7 pmid:29080918

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    2. Mazura JC,
    3. Karimi S,
    4. Pauliah M, et al

    . Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance perfusion compared with digital subtraction angiography for the evaluation of extradural spinal metastases: a pilot study. Spine 2014;39:E950–54 doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000409 pmid:24827525

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. Shi HB,
    3. Suh DC,
    4. Lee HK, et al

    . Preoperative transarterial embolization of spinal tumor: embolization techniques and results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1999;20:2009–15 pmid:10588136

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    2. Suzuki H,
    3. Kondo T,
    4. Kuwatsuru R, et al

    . Decompressive surgery in combination with preoperative transcatheter arterial embolization: successful improvement of ambulatory function in renal cell carcinoma patients with metastatic extradural spinal cord compression. Int J Urol 2011;18:718–22 doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2011.02822.x pmid:21815936

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    2. Tomita K,
    3. Kawahara N,
    4. Kobayashi T, et al

    . Surgical strategy for spinal metastases. Spine 2001;26:298–306 doi:10.1097/00007632-200102010-00016 pmid:11224867

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    2. Tokuhashi Y,
    3. Matsuzaki H,
    4. Oda H, et al

    . A revised scoring system for preoperative evaluation of metastatic spine tumor prognosis. Spine 2005;30:2186–91 doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000180401.06919.a5 pmid:16205345

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    2. Cappuccio M,
    3. Gasbarrini A,
    4. Van Urk P, et al

    . Spinal metastasis: a retrospective study validating the treatment algorithm. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2008;12:155–60 pmid:18700686

    PubMed
29. 29.↵
    2. Saha A,
    3. Peck KK,
    4. Lis E, et al

    . Magnetic resonance perfusion characteristics of hypervascular renal and hypovascular prostate spinal metastases: clinical utilities and implications. Spine 2014;39:E1433–40 doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000570 pmid:25188594

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    2. Clausen C,
    3. Dahl B,
    4. Christiansen Frevert S, et al

    . Inter- and intra-rater agreement in the assessment of the vascularity of spinal metastases using digital subtraction angiography tumor blush. Acta Radiol 2017;58:734–39 doi:10.1177/0284185116668215 pmid:27650032

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    2. Khadem NR,
    3. Karimi S,
    4. Peck KK, et al

    . Characterizing hypervascular and hypovascular metastases and normal bone marrow of the spine using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:2178–85 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3104 pmid:22555585

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    2. Shimoyama S,
    3. Nishii T,
    4. Watanabe Y, et al

    . Advantages of 70-kV CT angiography for the visualization of the Adamkiewicz artery: comparison with 120-kV imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:2399–405 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5372 pmid:28912277

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    2. Mendonca PR,
    3. Lamb P,
    4. Sahani DV

    . A flexible method for multi-material decomposition of dual-energy CT images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2014;33:99–116 doi:10.1109/TMI.2013.2281719 pmid:24058018

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    2. Dinkel J,
    3. Khalilzadeh O,
    4. Phan CM, et al

    . Technical limitations of dual-energy CT in neuroradiology: 30-month institutional experience and review of literature. J Neurointerv Surg 2015;7:596–602 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011241 pmid:24951287

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    2. Gupta R,
    3. Phan CM,
    4. Leidecker C, et al

    . Evaluation of dual-energy CT for differentiating intracerebral hemorrhage from iodinated contrast material staining. Radiology 2010;257:205–11 doi:10.1148/radiol.10091806 pmid:20679449

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
36. 36.↵
    2. Kuno H,
    3. Onaya H,
    4. Iwata R, et al

    . Evaluation of cartilage invasion by laryngeal and hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma with dual-energy CT. Radiology 2012;265:488–96 doi:10.1148/radiol.12111719 pmid:22984188

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    2. Hiyama T,
    3. Kuno H,
    4. Sekiya K, et al

    . Bone subtraction iodine imaging using area detector CT for evaluation of skull base invasion by nasopharyngeal carcinoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:135–41 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5906 pmid:30523140

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
38. 38.↵
    2. Ali IT,
    3. Wong WD,
    4. Liang T, et al

    . Clinical utility of dual-energy CT analysis of bone marrow edema in acute wrist fractures. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018;210:842–47 doi:10.2214/AJR.17.18673 pmid:29470155

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    2. Mallinson PI,
    3. Coupal TM,
    4. McLaughlin PD, et al

    . Dual-energy CT for the musculoskeletal system. Radiology 2016;281:690–707 doi:10.1148/radiol.2016151109 pmid:27870622

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    2. Yushkevich PA,
    3. Piven J,
    4. Hazlett HC, et al

    . User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage 2006;31:1116–28 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015 pmid:16545965

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science