Attenuation and Degree of Enhancement With Conventional 120-kVp Polychromatic CT and 70-keV Monochromatic Rapid Kilovoltage-Switching Dual-Energy CT in Cystic and Solid Renal Masses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare attenuation values (in Hounsfield units) and degree of enhancement (attenuation change) in renal masses using 120-kVp polychromatic (conventional) CT and 70-keV monochromatic dual-energy CT (DECT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-two patients with 39 renal masses (24 Bosniak category I and II cysts and 15 solid masses under active surveillance) underwent conventional CT (120-kVp unenhanced and contrast-enhanced CT) and rapid kilovoltage-switching DECT (120-kVp unenhanced CT and 70-keV contrast-enhanced CT). The mean (± SD) time between scans was 648 ± 943 days. A radiologist measured attenuation on matched image sets coregistered between examinations. Absolute attenuation and attenuation change were compared using independent t tests, Pearson correlation, and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: There was no difference in attenuation on 120-kVp versus 70-keV contrast-enhanced CT images for cysts (9.5 ± 5.5 HU [range, -2 to 20 HU] vs 10.1 ± 4.6 HU [range, -2 to 16 HU]; p = 0.33) and solid masses (110.1 ± 72.9 HU [range, 35-267 HU] vs 119.1 ± 73.7 HU [range, 33-265 HU]; p = 0.04). There also was no difference in attenuation change for 120-kVp contrast-enhanced CT minus 120-kVp unenhanced CT (cysts, 3.5 ± 3.9 HU [range, -2 to 13 HU]; solid masses, 80.7 ± 73.3 HU [range, 9-227 HU]; p = 0.45) or for 70-keV contrast-enhanced CT minus 120-kVp unenhanced CT (cysts, 4.3 ± 4.1 HU [range, -3 to 12 HU]; solid masses, 89.8 ± 74.1 HU [range, 7-226 HU]; p = 0.04). The correlation was strong to almost perfect (β = 0.83-0.98) with substantial agreement. There was no difference in attenuation of cysts and solid masses comparing 120-kVp acquisitions acquired at different time points (p = 0.20-0.92). The correlation was strong to almost perfect (β = 0.72-0.95) with substantial agreement. CONCLUSION: There are no differences in absolute attenuation or degree of enhancement comparing 70-keV monochromatic CT to conventional 120-kVp CT in renal cysts and solid masses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".