Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Comparison Between Postprocessing Techniques in the Analysis of Hepatic Arteries Using Multi-Detector-Row Computed Tomography Angiography

Saba, Luca MD*; Sanfilippo, Roberto MD; Anzidei, Michele MD; Montisci, Roberto MD; Pascalis, Luigi MD§; Mallarini, Giorgio MD*

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography: March-April 2011 - Volume 35 - Issue 2 - p 174-180
doi: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e318201f3be
Abdominal Imaging

Purpose: Our purpose was to compare 4 different postprocessing techniques (maximum-intensity projection [MIP], multiplanar reconstruction, curved planar reconstruction, and volume rendering [VR]) for the study of hepatic arteries.

Methods: One hundred thirty-seven patients who underwent multi-detector-row computed tomography angiography between August 2009 and January 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. For each patient and for each reconstruction method, the image quality was evaluated and the interobserver and intraobserver agreement was calculated according to Cohen statistics.

Results: The Pearson r between the observers for the common hepatic artery measurement (Hounsfield unit) was good (r = 0.88). The VR showed a Cohen κ value of 0.78, and the highest image-quality score was obtained using MIP (total value, 384; mean value, 3.01) for observer 1 and using VR and MIP for observer 2 (mean value of 2.94).

Conclusions: Maximum-intensity projection and VR showed the optimal interobserver and intraobserver agreement and the highest quality scores and therefore should be used as postprocessing techniques when analyzing the hepatic arteries.

From the Departments of *Radiology and †Vascular Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria (A.O.U.), Cagliari; ‡Department of Radiological Sciences, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome; and §Department of Internal Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria (A.O.U.), Cagliari, Italy.

Received for publication August 21, 2010; accepted September 28, 2010.

Reprints: Luca Saba, MD, Department of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria (A.O.U.), di Cagliari-Polo di Monserrato s.s. 554 Monserrato, Cagliari 09045, Italy (e-mail:

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest to the publication of this article.

The authors declare that they did not receive funding for research on which their article is based.

© 2011 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.