The aims of this study were to evaluate the agreement of computed tomography (CT)-perfusion parameter values of the normal renal cortex and various renal tumors, which were obtained by different mathematical models, and to evaluate their diagnostic accuracy.Materials and Methods
Perfusion imaging was performed prospectively in 35 patients to analyze 144 regions of interest of the normal renal cortex and 144 regions of interest of renal tumors, including 21 clear-cell renal cell carcinomas (RCC), 6 papillary RCCs, 5 oncocytomas, 1 chromophobe RCC, 1 angiomyolipoma with minimal fat, and 1 tubulocystic RCC. Identical source data were postprocessed and analyzed on 2 commercial software applications with the following implemented mathematical models: maximum slope, Patlak plot, standard singular-value decomposition (SVD), block-circulant SVD, oscillation-limited block-circulant SVD, and Bayesian estimation technique. Results for blood flow (BF), blood volume (BV), and mean transit time (MTT) were recorded. Agreement and correlation between pairs of models and perfusion parameters were assessed. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.Results
Significant differences and poor agreement of BF, BV, and MTT values were noted for most of model comparisons in both the normal renal cortex and different renal tumors. The correlations between most model pairs and perfusion parameters ranged between good and perfect (Spearman ρ = 0.79–1.00), except for BV values obtained by Patlak method (ρ = 0.61–0.72). All mathematical models computed BF and BV values, which differed significantly between clear cell RCCs, papillary RCCs, and oncocytomas, which introduces them as useful diagnostic tests to differentiate between different histologic subgroups (areas under ROC curve, 0.83–0.99). The diagnostic accuracy to discriminate between clear-cell RCCs and the renal cortex was the lowest based on the Patlak plot model (area under ROC curve, 0.76); BF and BV values obtained by other algorithms did not differ significantly in their diagnostic accuracy.Conclusions
Quantitative perfusion parameters obtained from different mathematical models cannot be used interchangeably. Based on BF and BV estimates, all models are a useful tool in the differential diagnosis of kidney tumors, with the Patlak plot model yielding a significantly lower diagnostic accuracy.