Retrospective Study Open Access
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Aug 28, 2025; 31(32): 110573
Published online Aug 28, 2025. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i32.110573
Diagnostic accuracy of dual-layer spectral computed tomography virtual monoenergetic imaging with multiplanar reformation for T-staging of colorectal cancer
Fei-Xiang Chen, Jian-Feng Zhu, Mei-Rong Wang, Xiao-Le Fan, Ju-Shun Yang, Bo-Sheng He, Department of Radiology, Nantong First People’s Hospital, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong 226001, Jiangsu Province, China
Ke-Ke Jiang, Department of Radiology, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong 226001, Jiangsu Province, China
Bo-Sheng He, Clinical Medicine Research Center, Nantong First People’s Hospital, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong 226001, Jiangsu Province, China
ORCID number: Fei-Xiang Chen (0000-0001-8227-1960); Mei-Rong Wang (0000-0002-1302-7996); Xiao-Le Fan (0000-0003-2716-5801); Bo-Sheng He (0000-0002-2242-2031).
Author contributions: Chen FX, He BS, and Yang JS designed the research; Wang MR, Fan XL, Jiang KK, and Zhu JF collected the research data; Chen FX, Zhu JF, Jiang KK, and Yang JS analyzed and interpreted the research data; Chen FX and He BS performed statistical analysis; Chen FX, He BS, Yang JS, and Fan XL provided funding support; Chen FX and Yang JS wrote the manuscript; He BS and Yang JS revised the manuscript for important intellectual content; all authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Supported by Jiangsu Province 333 Talent Key Industry Field Talent Project, No. [2022]21; Key Scientific Research Program of Jiangsu Provincial Health Committee, No. ZD2021059; Nantong Key Laboratory Project, No. [2020]163; The Project of Nantong City Health Committee, No. MS2023027; and Young Medical Talents Fund of Health and Family Planning Commission of Nantong, No. QA2019006 and No. QNZ2023027.
Institutional review board statement: This retrospective and single-center study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Nantong First People’s Hospital (Approval No. 2025KT124).
Informed consent statement: Patient consent was waived owing to the retrospective nature of the study.
Conflict-of-interest statement: No financial or nonfinancial benefits have been received or will be received from any party directly or indirectly related to the subject of this article.
Data sharing statement: All data generated or analyzed during this study are available from the corresponding author Bo-sheng He upon reasonable request.
Open Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Bo-Sheng He, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Nantong First People’s Hospital, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, No. 666 Shengli Road, Nantong 226001, Jiangsu Province, China. boshenghe@126.com
Received: June 11, 2025
Revised: July 6, 2025
Accepted: July 28, 2025
Published online: August 28, 2025
Processing time: 78 Days and 17.1 Hours

Abstract
BACKGROUND

Accurate preoperative T staging is essential for determining optimal treatment strategies in colorectal cancer (CRC). Low-keV virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs) have been shown to enhance lesion conspicuity. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic value of dual-layer spectral computed tomography (CT)-derived VMIs, in combination with multiplanar reformation (MPR) and evaluation of peritumoral fat stranding (PFS), for improving the accuracy of T staging in CRC.

AIM

To assess the diagnostic performance of dual-layer spectral CT (DLSCT) VMIs, particularly at low energy levels, and their integration with personalized MPR for preoperative T staging of CRC.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 157 patients with pathologically confirmed CRC (mean age: 63.5 ± 12.1 years) underwent DLSCT within 1 week before surgery. VMIs ranging from 40 keV to 70 keV (at 10 keV intervals) and conventional polyenergetic images (PEIs) were reconstructed. Objective image quality parameters, including image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), were quantified, alongside subjective image quality scores using a 5-point Likert scale. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using κ statistics. Taking histopathology as the reference standard, the diagnostic accuracy of T staging (T1-2 vs T3-4) was compared across PEIs and VMIs, both with and without MPR and PFS.

RESULTS

Low-keV VMIs (40-70 keV) demonstrated significantly higher SNR and CNR than PEIs (all P < 0.001). Notably, 40-keV VMIs achieved noise levels comparable to PEIs (8.17 ± 3.63 vs 8.53 ± 2.90; P = 0.673). Subjective image quality peaked at 40-50 keV VMIs (Likert scores 4.85-4.88 vs 3.97 for PEIs; P < 0.001), supported by excellent interobserver agreement (κ = 0.812-0.913). The combination of 40-50 keV VMIs with MPR yielded the highest T staging accuracy (94.27%) compared to axial PEIs (70.7%), with a sensitivity and specificity of 83.87% and 96.83%, respectively (Youden index = 0.81; P < 0.05). While PFS enhanced staging accuracy on PEIs (up to 77.07% with MPR), it provided no significant additional benefit for VMIs.

CONCLUSION

DLSCT VMIs at 40-50 keV significantly enhanced image quality and improved preoperative T staging accuracy of CRC when combined with MPR. These findings underscored the clinical value of low-keV spectral imaging in tailoring individualized treatment strategies.

Key Words: Colorectal cancer; Dual-layer spectral computed tomography; Multiplanar reformation; Peritumoral fat stranding; T staging; Virtual monoenergetic images

Core Tip: Accurate preoperative T staging is critical for guiding individualized therapeutic strategies in colorectal cancer (CRC). However, conventional computed tomography demonstrates limited diagnostic performance, with reported accuracies ranging from 60.6% to 89%. This study demonstrated that low-energy (40-50 keV) virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs), when combined with multiplanar reformation (MPR), could substantially improve T staging accuracy to as high as 94.27%. While peritumoral fat stranding further enhanced staging accuracy on polyenergetic images, MPR alone achieved an accuracy of 77.07%. These findings supported the incorporation of low-keV VMIs and MPR into routine preoperative imaging protocols to optimize CRC staging and management.



INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks as the third most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide. In 2022 alone, over 1.9 million new cases were reported, with approximately 900000 deaths, figures that underscore significant regional disparities in both epidemiology and clinical outcomes[1]. Accurate preoperative T-staging is pivotal in guiding optimal treatment strategies, including surgical resection, neoadjuvant therapy, or organ-preserving approaches. However, nearly one-quarter of patients with locally advanced CRC are mismanaged due to inaccurate staging[2,3]. The 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM classification emphasizes the critical role of precise T staging in risk stratification, prognostic assessment, and the formulation of personalized treatment plans[4].

Medical imaging plays an indispensable role in determining the T-stage of CRC. Each modality offers distinct advantages. Endoscopic ultrasound, which allows detailed visualization of bowel wall layers, is commonly employed for rectal cancer staging[5]. Colonoscopic high-frequency mini-probe ultrasonography demonstrates superior accuracy compared to conventional computed tomography (CT) in the local staging of colonic cancer. Regarding nodal assessment, 12-MHz ultrasonography outperforms both CT and 20-MHz ultrasonography in diagnostic accuracy[6]. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the gold standard for rectal cancer due to its superior soft tissue contrast, achieving a sensitivity of 87% and specificity of 75% for identifying T1-2 and T3-4 tumors. Moreover, MRI effectively assesses tumor penetration depth, nodal involvement, and extramural vascular invasion[7]. In contrast to the high accuracy of MRI in staging rectal cancer, the diagnostic accuracy for T3-stage colon cancer remains relatively low, ranging from 51% to 71%[8]. CT, although lower in soft tissue resolution, remains widely utilized owing to its accessibility and cost-effectiveness. The combined use of MRI and CT for preoperative T-staging has demonstrated superior accuracy in patients with CRC, compared to either modality used alone[9]. CT is particularly valuable for evaluating extramural tumor spread and detecting distant metastases[10]. High-performance CT can contribute to accurate preoperative tumor staging in colon cancer[11].

Traditional CT staging typically relies on axial contrast-enhanced images[11]. One of the most informative imaging signs for assessing tumor infiltration depth and differentiating between T1-2 and T3-4 stages is peritumoral fat stranding (PFS), characterized by fat infiltration or nodularity in the mesorectal region following tumor invasion through the bowel wall. Multiple studies have demonstrated a strong correlation between the presence of PFS and pathological T3-T4 staging, as well as poor prognosis[12-14]. The application of multiplanar reformation (MPR) techniques, which enable coronal and sagittal reconstructions, can significantly enhance spatial resolution. Incorporating MPR into CT interpretation has been shown to improve T-staging accuracy to as high as 89%, facilitating a more precise assessment of tumor invasion and lymph node involvement[15-19].

Dual-layer spectral CT (DLSCT) represents a novel advancement in spectral imaging technology[20]. By simultaneously acquiring both high- and low-energy photon data, DLSCT enables the reconstruction of virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs) across a wide energy range, typically spanning from 40 keV to 200 keV. Low-keV VMIs, particularly at 40 keV, are known to enhance iodine contrast, accentuate differences in tissue attenuation, and improve the conspicuity of lesions, thereby facilitating more precise delineation between malignant and normal tissues[21,22].

Given its ability to enhance contrast and anatomical detail, this technology holds considerable promise beyond CRC, with potential applications across a wide range of gastrointestinal malignancies, especially in early detection, precise staging, and treatment response evaluation[23].

Despite these advantages, the combined use of low-keV VMI and MPR in the context of CRC T-staging has been insufficiently explored. The synergistic integration of enhanced soft-tissue contrast from VMI, improved anatomical resolution from MPR and the visualization of PFS, a key imaging biomarker associated with advanced T-stage, may improve the diagnostic accuracy of CRC. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of DLSCT-based VMIs combined with MPR for accurate T staging in CRC, thereby providing a more robust imaging strategy for clinical decision-making.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Participants

A retrospective study was performed involving 157 patients with pathologically confirmed CRC who were treated at Nantong First People’s Hospital between November 2023 and December 2024. The study protocol received approval from the institutional ethics committee (Approval No. 2025KT124). Inclusion criteria were: (1) No known allergy to iodinated contrast agents; (2) Preoperative contrast-enhanced spectral CT scan of the abdomen conducted within 1 week prior to surgery; (3) No history of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or other preoperative treatments; and (4) Complete clinical records and definitive postoperative pathological staging. Exclusion criteria encompassed: (1) Severe allergy to iodine contrast or impaired renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate < 40 mL/minute/1.73 m²); (2) Missing or incomplete clinical, surgical, or pathological data; (3) Inadequate image quality preventing accurate assessment; (4) Significant cardiopulmonary dysfunction or coexistence of other malignancies; and (5) Lesions too small to allow reliable measurement or placement of regions of interest (ROIs) on CT images.

Imaging protocol

All patients underwent spectral CT imaging using the IQon Spectral CT scanner (Philips Healthcare, Netherlands), with the scanning range extending from the diaphragmatic dome to the inferior border of the pubic symphysis. The DLSCT acquisition parameters were as follows (Table 1): Tube voltage set at 120 kVp; automatic tube current modulation (mAs); detector collimation of 64 mm × 0.625 mm; gantry rotation time of 0.4 seconds per rotation; and a pitch of 1. An intravenous injection of the nonionic iodinated contrast agent Iohexol (350 mg iodine/mL; Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine Co., Ltd., China) was administered using a high-pressure injector at a rate of 3.0 mL/second, with a dosage of 1.5 mL/kg body weight. Bolus tracking was employed by placing an ROI in the abdominal aorta, initiating arterial phase acquisition when attenuation reached 150 Hounsfield units (HU), followed by venous phase imaging after a 40-second delay. Spectral base images were reconstructed with a slice thickness and reconstruction interval of 1 mm.

Table 1 Dual-layer spectral computed tomography parameters.
Scan parameters and contrast agent injection protocol
Details
Scan parameters
    RangeDiaphragmatic dome to the inferior pubic symphysis
    Tube voltage (kV)120
    Tube currentAutomatic tube current modulation
    Detector collimation (mm)64 × 0.625
    Gantry rotation speed (second)0.4
    Pitch1.0
Contrast agent
    Concentration (mg/mL)350
    Dose (mL/kg)1.5
    Rate (mL/s)3.0
Monitoring
    Monitoring methodBolus tracking
    Monitoring levelAbdominal aorta
    Monitoring threshold (HU)150
Scan phasesArterial phase, venous phase (delayed by 40 seconds)
Image processing

Spectral base images from the venous phase were used to generate both VMIs and polyenergetic images (PEIs) via dedicated post-processing software (IntelliSpace Portal 10.0, Philips Healthcare)[24]. VMIs ranging from 40 keV to 70 keV were reconstructed at 10-keV intervals using a spectral reconstruction algorithm (Spectral level 3, Philips Healthcare). In contrast, PEIs were reconstructed with an iterative reconstruction algorithm (iDose4, Philips Healthcare) employing a standard soft tissue kernel. MPR was performed on both VMIs and PEIs at 40-70 keV. Oblique axial (OA) planes were reconstructed perpendicular to the tumor’s longitudinal axis mainly for T-staging, while coronal planes were reconstructed parallel to it for assisting in T-staging. The reformation parameters included a slice thickness and interval of 2 mm each[19].

Objective image evaluation

For each patient, image analysis was performed at the level of the largest tumor cross-section. Circular ROIs were manually placed within the colorectal tumor, avoiding tumor margins, bowel wall vessels, necrotic regions, and areas of peritumoral inflammation. A circular ROI with a diameter of approximately 8 mm and an area of 50 mm2 was placed within the subcutaneous fat layer. If the thickness of the subcutaneous fat layer was less than 8 mm, the ROI diameter was adjusted to two-thirds of the measured thickness. The ROI size and location were standardized and replicated across PEI and all VMIs (40-70 keV) to ensure consistency. Each measurement was repeated three times and averaged. Circular ROIs placed within the subcutaneous fat determined the SD, which served as a quantitative surrogate for image noise. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated using the following formulas: SNR = HUtumor/SDtumor; and CNR = (HUtumor - HUfat)/SDfat.

Subjective image evaluation

Two senior radiologists, with 10 and 15 years of experience in abdominal imaging, independently reviewed all images for objective image evaluation, blinded to clinical and pathological data. Image quality and T-stage were assessed using standardized evaluation criteria. Further methodological details on subjective image quality assessment and T-staging are as follows: Two physicians independently evaluated subjective image quality and T-staging, and interobserver agreement for both assessments was calculated. Discordant T-stage assessments were re-reviewed until consensus was reached, after which diagnostic performance was compared against the pathological gold standard. Image quality was rated on a 5-point Likert scale[25] as follows: Score 5 (excellent) indicated lesions sharply defined with outstanding contrast, minimal image noise, no artifacts, and high diagnostic confidence; Score 4 (good) indicated clearly delineated lesions with excellent contrast, low image noise, mild artifacts, and no change in confidence; Score 3 (moderate) referred to adequately visualized lesions with good contrast, moderate noise and artifacts, decreased confidence but diagnosis still feasible; Score 2 (poor) described difficult lesion identification, suboptimal contrast, strong noise, severe artifacts, and degraded confidence rendering diagnosis questionable; and Score 1 (non-diagnostic) denoted barely visible lesions with poor contrast, very strong noise, severe artifacts, making diagnosis impossible.

T-staging criteria

T-staging was performed in accordance with the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM classification system[4]. The definitions were as follows: T1, tumor invasion limited to the submucosa; T2, invasion into the muscularis propria; T3, extension beyond the muscularis propria into the subserosa or pericolorectal tissues; T4a, penetration of the visceral peritoneum; and T4b, direct invasion into adjacent organs or structures. Corresponding spectral CT staging criteria[19] were adapted as: T1, lesion confined to the submucosa with smooth bowel wall contours (Figure 1A); T2, involvement of the muscularis propria without evidence of pericolic fat stranding (Figure 1B); T3, irregular bowel wall accompanied by nodular or infiltrative spread into the perienteric fat (Figure 1C); and T4, invasion into the visceral peritoneum or neighboring anatomical structures (Figure 1D). Three diagnostic approaches were evaluated against pathological staging (pT1-2 vs pT3-4): (1) Morphological assessment using spectral CT criteria; (2) Identification of PFS, with a positive finding indicating T3-4; and (3) A composite method combining both criteria, with the higher stage taken as the final judgment.

Figure 1
Figure 1 Computed tomography staging criteria. A: A 73-year-old male patient with histological stage T1 tumor. The 40 keV oblique axial (OA) virtual monoenergetic image in venous phase showed a sigmoid colon mucosal mass (white arrow) surrounding 1/3 of the lumen with clearly visible normal bowel wall muscularis propria appearing (orange arrow) with relatively low density and without peritumoral fat stranding (PFS) indicative of T1 stage disease; B: A 53-year-old female patient with histological stage T2 tumor. The 40 keV OA virtual monoenergetic image in venous phase showed an upper rectal tumor (orange arrow) surrounding 2/3 of the lumen with a smooth outer border of thickened rectal wall and without PFS indicative of T2 stage disease; C: A 65-year-old male patient with histological stage T3 tumor. The 40 keV OA virtual monoenergetic image in venous phase demonstrated a sigmoid colon tumor with an irregular border and (orange arrow) spiculations extending into the peri-rectal fat, along with PFS sign (white arrow) - findings indicative of stage T3 disease; D: A 63-year-old male patient with histological stage T4 tumor. The 40 keV OA virtual monoenergetic image in venous phase demonstrated a tumor at the hepatic flexure surrounding the entire lumen (white arrow) with infiltration into peritumoral fat and invasion of adjacent liver (orange arrow) indicative of T4 stage disease.
Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS software (version 26.0; IBM Corp., Chicago, IL, United States). Continuous variables with normal distributions are presented as mean ± SD, whereas non-normally distributed variables are expressed as median ± interquartile range. Homogeneity of variance was first assessed for objective image quality parameters. When variance was homogeneous, one-way ANOVA followed by least significant difference post hoc tests was applied; otherwise, the Kruskal-Wallis test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used for multiple and pairwise comparisons, respectively. Subjective image quality ratings were analyzed using non-parametric tests. Interobserver agreement for both image quality assessment and T-staging was quantified using weighted κ and standard κ statistics. Agreement was categorized as poor (< 0.4), moderate (0.4-0.6), good (0.6-0.8), or excellent (0.8-1.0). Diagnostic performance metrics, including accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the Youden index, were compared between VMIs (40-70 keV) and PEIs using the McNemar test. A two-tailed P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS
Patients

A total of 157 patients (59 females and 98 males; mean age, 63.5 ± 12.1 years) were included in this study, all of whom had surgically and histopathologically confirmed CRC (Figure 2). Detailed demographic and clinical characteristics are summarized in Table 2.

Figure 2
Figure 2  Patient recruitment flowchart.
Table 2 Patient demographic characteristics.
Characteristic
Percentage/cohort details
Sex, n (%)
    Male98 (62.4)
    Female59 (37.6)
Age (mean ± SD, year)63.5 ± 12.1
Pathological stage, n (%)
    T114 (8.9)
    T217 (10.8)
    T3118 (75.2)
    T48 (5.1)
Differentiation grade, n (%)
    G19 (5.7)
    G2142 (90.4)
    G36 (3.8)
Tumor location
    Rectum87 (55.4)
    Sigmoid colon31 (19.7)
    Descending colon11 (7.0)
    Splenic flexure1 (0.6)
    Transverse colon7 (4.5)
    Hepatic flexure1 (0.6)
    Ascending colon19 (12.1)
Image quality evaluation (objective and subjective)

Significant differences were observed in image noise, SNR, and CNR between the 40-70 keV VMIs and the PEIs (all P < 0.001). Notably, the noise level of the 40 keV VMIs (8.17 ± 3.63) was statistically comparable to that of the PEIs (8.53 ± 2.90, P = 0.673), but noise levels decreased progressively with rising keV levels. No statistically significant difference was found between adjacent VMI energy levels (P > 0.05). Compared to PEIs, VMIs at all energy levels demonstrated significantly enhanced SNR and CNR (SNR: 10.73 ± 3.26 to 18.13 ± 7.09 vs 8.41 ± 2.45, P < 0.001; CNR: 27.89 ± 12.11 to 45.69 ± 22.76 vs 23.09 ± 8.95, P < 0.001). Both SNR and CNR decreased as the keV increased (all P < 0.05; Tables 3 and 4).

Table 3 Subjective and objective image quality assessments of 40-70 keV virtual monoenergetic images and polyenergetic images in colorectal cancer evaluation (n = 157).
Subjective/objective
PEIs
40 keV VMIs
50 keV VMIs
60 keV VMIs
70 keV VMIs
Z value
P value
Noise8.53 ± 2.908.17 ± 3.637.27 ± 3.186.83 ± 2.736.57 ± 2.5874.521< 0.001
SNR8.41 ± 2.4518.13 ± 7.0914.81 ± 5.0912.60 ± 4.0510.73 ± 3.26427.420< 0.001
CNR23.09 ± 8.9545.69 ± 22.7637.85 ± 18.1231.58 ± 13.6027.89 ± 12.11275.540< 0.001
Subjective scores3.97 ± 0.424.88 ± 0.334.85 ± 0.364.69 ± 0.504.11 ± 0.49376.086< 0.001
Table 4 Intergroup comparisons of subjective and objective image quality parameters for 40-70 keV virtual monoenergetic images and polyenergetic images in colorectal cancer evaluation (n = 157).
Subjective/objective
PEIs
40 keV VMIs
50 keV VMIs
60 keV VMIs
70 keV VMIs
NoisePEI-0.673< 0.001< 0.001< 0.001
40 keV VMIs--0.054< 0.001< 0.001
50 keV VMIs---0.8730.075
60 keV VMIs----1.000
70 keV VMIs-----
SNRPEIs-< 0.001< 0.001< 0.001< 0.001
40 keV VMIs--< 0.001< 0.001< 0.001
50 keV VMIs---< 0.001< 0.001
60 keV VMIs----< 0.001
70 keV VMIs-----
CNRPEIs-< 0.001< 0.001< 0.001< 0.001
40 keV VMIs--0.002< 0.001< 0.001
50 keV VMIs---0.001< 0.001
60 keV VMIs----< 0.001
70 keV VMIs-----
Subjective scoresPEIs-< 0.001< 0.001< 0.0010.376
40 keV VMIs--1.0000.033< 0.001
50 keV VMIs---0.120< 0.001
60 keV VMIs----< 0.001
70 keV VMIs-----

Subjective image quality scores also varied significantly across the different energy levels (P < 0.001). The highest scores were consistently achieved at 40 keV and 50 keV VMIs, surpassing those of PEIs and higher-energy VMIs (4.85 ± 0.36 to 4.88 ± 0.33 vs 3.97 ± 0.42 to 4.11 ± 0.49, P < 0.001; Tables 3 and 4).

Interobserver agreement analysis

Cohen’s κ values for interobserver agreement between the two radiologists assessing image quality across 40-70 keV VMIs and PEIs were 0.913, 0.812, 0.812, 0.766, and 0.789, respectively (all P < 0.001). The agreement was classified as excellent (κ ≥ 0.81) for PEIs, 40 keV, and 50 keV VMIs, and as good (κ = 0.61-0.80) for 60 keV and 70 keV VMIs. These findings highlighted the consistently high interrater reliability, particularly at lower keV levels, which are crucial for improving the conspicuity of colorectal lesions. Additional details are presented in Table 5.

Table 5 Interobserver agreement analysis of subjective quality scores between two radiologists for 40-70 keV virtual monoenergetic images and polyenergetic images (n = 157).
Subjective quality scores
Doctor B
3
4
5
κ
P value
Doctor APEIs314000.913< 0.001
421302
5009
40 keV VMIs30000.812< 0.001
40152
504136
50 keV VMIs30000.813< 0.001
40182
505132
60 keV VMIs32100.766< 0.001
41325
509107
70 keV VMIs311000.789< 0.001
401074
501124
Interobserver agreement for T-staging assessments

The Cohen’s κ values reflecting interobserver agreement between the two radiologists for T staging assessment across PEIs and 40-70 keV VMI MPR reconstructions were as follows: 0.891 for axial PEIs, 0.899 for OA PEIs, 0.943 for 40 keV OA VMIs, 0.924 for 50 keV OA VMIs, 0.843 for 60 keV OA VMIs, and 0.906 for 70 keV OA VMIs (all P < 0.001). All κ values met or exceeded the threshold for excellent agreement (κ ≥ 0.81), underscoring strong reproducibility in T-stage assessments across both PEIs and VMIs. Notably, OA VMIs demonstrated consistently high agreement, further affirming their reliability in clinical evaluation. Additional details are provided in Table 6.

Table 6 Interobserver agreement for T-staging assessments between two radiologists for 40-70 keV virtual monoenergetic images and polyenergetic images (n = 157).

Images
T staging
Doctor B
T1
T2
T3-4
κ
P value
Doctor AAxial PEIsT12000.891< 0.001
T21293
T3-402123
OA PEIsT12000.899< 0.001
T21332
T3-403116
40 keV OA VMIsT115000.943< 0.001
T21142
T3-400125
50 keV OA VMIsT113000.924< 0.001
T22152
T3-400125
60 keV OA VMIsT14100.843< 0.001
T22213
T3-402124
70 keV OA VMIsT13000.906< 0.001
T21273
T3-401122
Diagnostic efficacy of preoperative T-staging in CRC

The comparison between subjectively assessed imaging and postoperative pathological staging (pT stage) revealed that the diagnostic accuracy of axial PEIs for CRC was 70.7% (sensitivity 38.71%, specificity 78.57%). Evaluation based solely on the presence of PFS achieved an accuracy of 68.79% (sensitivity 54.84%, specificity 72.22%), while the combination of morphological assessment and fat stranding yielded an identical accuracy of 70.7% (sensitivity 38.71%, specificity 78.56%).

With the use of MPR for OA reconstruction, diagnostic performance improved. For OA PEIs, morphological evaluation achieved an accuracy of 76.43% (sensitivity 45.16%, specificity 84.13%), PFS showed 73.89% (sensitivity 80.65%, specificity 72.22%), and the combined evaluation further enhanced accuracy to 77.07% (sensitivity 45.16%, specificity 84.92%).

The highest diagnostic performance was observed with OA 40 and 50 keV VMIs, yielding an accuracy of 94.27% (sensitivity 83.87%, specificity 96.83%; Figures 3 and 4) and a Youden index of 0.81. This was significantly superior to axial PEIs, OA PEIs, and 60-70 keV VMIs. Diagnostic accuracy declined progressively with increasing keV levels. When relying solely on the PFS sign, the accuracy of 40 and 50 keV VMIs dropped to 73.25% and 76.43%, respectively. Complete data are presented in Table 7.

Figure 3
Figure 3 T-staging in axial polyenergetic image, oblique axial polyenergetic image, and 40-70 keV oblique axial virtual monoenergetic images for T3 stage by pathology. An upper rectal cancer patient with axial polyenergetic image (PEI), oblique axial (OA) PEI, and 40-70 keV oblique virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs), was proved to be T3 by pathology. A: Axial PEI showed a smooth outer border of the thickened rectal wall without peritumoral fat stranding (PFS), suggesting stage T2; B-F: Oblique PEI (B) and 70-40 keV OA VMIs (C-F) demonstrated a smooth outer border of the thickened rectal wall with spiculation extending into the perirectal fat (orange arrow) but without PFS, suggesting stage T3. Compared to axial PEI (A), the lesion was better visualized at 40-50 keV due to increased lesion attenuation and hyper-enhancement at the anterior rectal wall. Among all images, the 40-50 keV OA VMIs (E and F) performed best.
Figure 4
Figure 4 T-staging in axial polyenergetic image, oblique axial polyenergetic image and 40-70 keV oblique axial virtual monoenergetic images for T2 stage by pathology. A middle rectal cancer patient with axial polyenergetic image (PEI), oblique PEI and 40-70 keV oblique axial (OA) virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs), was proved to be T2 by pathology. A: Axial PEI showed a smooth outer border of the thickened rectal wall with peritumoral fat stranding (PFS; white arrow), suggesting stage T3; B-F: Oblique PEI (B) and 70-40 keV OA VMIs (C-F) demonstrated the lesion located in the left anterior wall (orange arrow) of the rectal wall and the outer border of the thickened rectal wall was smooth. No spiculations extending into the perirectal fat and PFS was found, suggesting stage T2. Compared to axial PEI (A), the lesion was better visualized at 40-50 keV VMIs due to increased lesion attenuation and hyper-enhancement. Among all images, the 40-50 keV OA VMIs (E and F) performed best.
Table 7 Diagnostic performance of 40-70 keV virtual monoenergetic images and polyenergetic images in preoperative staging of T1-2 and T3-4 colorectal cancer.
Images
CT T-staging
Pathological staging
Accuracy
(%)
Sensitivity
(%)
Specificity
(%)
Youden index
T1-2 (n = 31)
T3-4 (n = 126)
Axial PEIsT1-2121970.738.7178.560.17
T3-42799
PFST1-2171468.7954.8472.220.27
T3-43591
Axial PEIs and PFST1-2121970.738.7178.560.17
T3-42799
OA PEIsT1-2141776.4345.1684.130.29
T3-420106
PFST1-225673.8980.6572.220.53
T3-43591
OA PEIs and PFST1-2141777.0745.1684.920.30
T3-419107
40 keV OA VIMsT1-226594.2783.8796.830.81
T3-44122
PFST1-225673.2580.6571.430.52
T3-43690
40 keV OA VMIs and PFST1-225693.6380.6596.830.77
T3-44122
50 keV OA VMIsT1-226594.2783.8796.830.81
T3-44122
PFST1-225676.4380.6576.190.57
T3-43696
50 keV OA VMIs and PFST1-225693.6380.6596.830.77
T3-44122
60 keV OA VMIsT1-2181384.0858.0690.480.49
T3-412114
PFST1-225673.2580.6571.430.52
T3-43690
60 keV OA VMIs and PFST1-2181384.0858.0690.480.49
T3-412114
70 keV OA VMIsT1-2161580.2551.6187.300.39
T3-416110
PFST1-225673.2580.6571.430.52
T3-43690
70 keV OA VMIs and PFST1-2161580.2551.6187.300.39
T3-416110
DISCUSSION

In this study, we systematically evaluated both subjective and objective image quality parameters of PEIs and 40-70 keV VMIs, alongside interobserver consistency in image quality and T-stage assessments. Furthermore, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of T staging using PEIs and 40-70 keV VMIs, with or without MPR and PFS, against pathological staging. Our findings revealed that 40-50 keV VMIs demonstrated noise levels comparable to those of PEIs, while achieving significantly superior SNR, CNR, and subjective image quality scores. Notably, the 40 keV and 50 keV OA VMIs exhibited excellent interobserver agreement for both image quality and T-stage evaluations, achieving a diagnostic accuracy of 94.27% (Youden index: 0.81). While the addition of PFS improved T staging accuracy for both axial and oblique PEIs, it conferred no substantial benefit for 40-70 keV VMIs.

Virtual monoenergetic imaging, a derivative of DLSCT, enhances lesion conspicuity, particularly for small lesions. In our cohort, noise levels at 40-50 keV (8.17 ± 3.63) were statistically indistinguishable from those of PEIs (8.53 ± 2.90, P = 0.673). Additionally, image noise declined steadily with increasing keV levels (up to 70 keV), remaining consistently below that of PEIs. This could be attributed primarily to the use of a DLSCT system, which enabled fully time- and position-matched projection-domain reconstruction of low- and high-energy data VMIs, thereby reducing beam hardening artifacts and convolution kernel-related artifacts[20,26,27], suppressing anticorrelated noise between the two datasets[28,29], and further diminishing image noise through model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms[30]. This approach fundamentally differs from traditional dual-source dual-energy CT platforms (e.g., Siemens systems)[31], which perform image domain reconstruction. These findings are consistent with those reported by Arico' et al[22] and El Kayal et al[32]. Given the K-edge of iodine at 33.2 keV, photon energies around 40 keV maximized iodine attenuation, optimizing lesion conspicuity by enhancing the contrast between the tumor and normal bowel wall. Consequently, 40 keV VMIs achieved superior SNR and CNR compared to PEIs, with performance declining at 70 keV (CNR: 27.89 ± 12.11), consistent with prior studies by Arico' et al[22] and Jia et al[33].

Consequently, the superior tumor delineation achieved by low keV VMIs was reflected in significantly higher subjective image quality scores (4.88 ± 0.33 and 4.85 ± 0.36 for 40 keV and 50 keV, respectively), compared to 70 keV (4.11 ± 0.49) and PEIs (3.97 ± 0.42). Interobserver agreement was also excellent for PEIs and 40-50 keV VMIs (κ = 0.812-0.913), but dropped markedly at 60-70 keV (κ = 0.766-0.789), likely due to diminished contrast resolution at higher energy levels. Despite the high consistency in PEI image quality assessments, their diagnostic accuracy for T staging remained limited at 70.7%, underscoring their inferiority to VMIs in reliably staging colorectal tumors.

Accurate preoperative T staging of CRC is pivotal for guiding individualized treatment plans and estimating patient prognosis. Current staging techniques include morphological analysis, detection of PFS, quantification of imaging biomarkers[34], identification of extramural vascular invasion[17], and integration of multiparametric spectral data[35-37]. In our study, axial PEIs yielded a T staging accuracy of 70.7% (sensitivity: 38.71%; specificity: 78.57%), which improved with OA MPR reconstruction to 76.43% (sensitivity: 45.16%; specificity: 84.13%). These findings aligned with prior reports demonstrating staging accuracies ranging from 60.6% to 87.1%[38-40], although slightly below the 81.6%-89% reported in higher-performing studies[15,16,18,19,41-43]. The use of MPR markedly enhances visualization of tumor invasion depth and its relationship with surrounding pericolonic fat across multiple planes, overcoming the limitations of conventional axial PEIs and substantially improving the comprehensiveness of tumor invasion assessment. This benefit has been validated in previous literature[44].

Importantly, implementing 40-50 keV VMIs markedly improved T-staging accuracy, increasing it from 80.25% (sensitivity: 51.61%; specificity: 87.30%) to 94.27% (sensitivity: 83.87%; specificity: 96.83%; Youden index: 0.81). This improvement was largely attributed to more precise differentiation of early-stage tumors (T1-T2), with correct identification increasing from 12/31 to 26/31 cases. Enhanced tumor tissue exhibited distinct attenuation characteristics compared to the normal bowel wall. VMIs at 40-50keV, predominantly governed by the photoelectric effect, significantly increased contrast between tumor tissue and normal bowel wall, creating a clear attenuation gradient. This facilitated superior visualization of tumor boundaries, mucosal disruption, and muscular layer involvement compared to conventional CT. Notably, enhanced tumor tissue achieved optimal iodine contrast at 40 keV VMIs, closely aligning with the iodine K-edge (33.2 keV)[26,45]. The synergistic effect of 40-50 keV VMIs combined with MPR enabled detailed morphological evaluation of tumor invasion, compensating for the inherent limitations of conventional axial CT[33,46] and ultimately improving the accuracy of CT-based staging. However, it is worth noting that the dichotomization of T-stages into T1-2 vs T3-4 may have led to a slight overestimation of diagnostic accuracy.

PFS may indicate either direct tumor infiltration[24] or inflammatory changes in fat metabolism[47]. While integrating MPR with PEIs improved diagnostic accuracy from 70.7% to 77.07%, this enhancement was not observed with VMIs. This discrepancy may arise from differences in attenuation characteristics of peritumoral fat and tumor tissues at varying energy levels in VMIs. Tissue attenuation at lower energies is predominantly governed by the photoelectric effect. Due to its lower electron density and effective atomic number, peritumoral fat absorbs more low-energy photons, resulting in relatively lower attenuation values[27,48]. Conversely, tumor tissues exhibit a nonlinear increase in attenuation as keV decreases, amplifying the contrast between tumor and peritumoral fat. PEIs show higher attenuation values in peritumoral fat compared to low-keV VMIs, leading to relatively reduced contrast with tumor tissue. Consequently, subtle fat stranding sometimes visible on PEIs becomes less conspicuous on low-keV VMIs owing to these attenuation properties. In contrast, low-keV VMIs provide superior delineation of tumor margins and infiltration depth, particularly via OA morphological evaluation. Thus, the inherent advantages of low-keV imaging outweigh the potential additional value of PFS. Moreover, PFS may be confounded by inflammatory changes, as previously reported[49]. Additionally, PFS has been correlated with circumferential tumor involvement, lesion length, positive resection margins, and lymphovascular invasion[14,50]. Therefore, T-staging can be assessed by observing the extent of tumor invasion on low-keV OA VMIs, rather than relying solely on the presence of PFS.

This study demonstrated an improved T-staging accuracy of 94.27%. Compared to axial PEIs, the number of correctly identified T1-2 stage cases increased from 12/31 (38.71%) to 26/31 (83.87%), while correctly staged T3-4 cases rose from 99/126 (78.57%) to 122/126 (96.83%) following the application of 40 keV OA VMIs. According to the 2024 NCCN guidelines for CRC[2,3], surgical resection is recommended for T1-2 stages, whereas radical surgery combined with adjuvant therapy, including preoperative chemoradiotherapy for CRC patients, is advised for T3-4 stages to enhance resection rates and survival outcomes. Improved T-staging accuracy facilitates more precise therapeutic decision-making, such as avoiding unnecessary neoadjuvant therapy in T1-2 patients and ensuring timely preoperative chemoradiotherapy for T3-4 patients, ultimately improving surgical outcomes[51]. Notably, the 5-year survival rate for T3 stage CRC patients increases from 73.0% to 77.2% with accurate staging[52]. Moreover, precise preoperative T staging reduces complication rates related to intraoperative vascular and adjacent tissue injury[17] and serves as a critical prognostic indicator, with reported 5-year survival rates for non-metastatic colon cancer of 96% for T1, 89% for T2, 75% for T3, and 79% for T4[53]. Furthermore, T stage strongly correlates with recurrence risk, as evidenced by 5-year local disease-free survival rates of 84.0% for T4 vs 98.6% for T3[54]. Previous studies have consistently confirmed that accurate T staging aids clinical decision-making, minimizes complications, and improves prognosis[51-54]. Nevertheless, the clinical implications of enhanced T-staging accuracy using 40 keV OA VMIs, particularly regarding treatment planning, intraoperative complications, and long-term prognosis, warrant further prospective investigation.

Limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, this was a retrospective, single-center investigation, and thus, the generalizability of our findings requires validation through larger, multicenter studies. Second, this study focused on T-staging interpretation using OA VMIs and did not incorporate quantitative parameters such as spectral curve slope. Future research should investigate the predictive value of parameters including 40-70 keV interval slopes, iodine concentration, normalized iodine concentration, electron density, and effective atomic number for staging, prognosis, and neoadjuvant therapy efficacy, thereby advancing the multiparametric evaluation system. Third, MRI, the established gold standard for rectal cancer staging, was not employed for comparative validation. Fourth, the clinical implications of improved T-staging accuracy using 40 keV OA VIMs, particularly regarding treatment planning, intraoperative complications, and prognosis enhancement, still require further prospective studies.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, 40-50 keV VMIs derived from DLSCT significantly enhanced both subjective and objective image quality in the preoperative T staging of CRC. Compared with PEIs, 40-50 keV VMIs demonstrated superior noise characteristics, higher SNR and CNR, excellent interobserver agreement (κ ≥ 0.81), and outstanding diagnostic accuracy (94.27%, Youden index: 0.81). These findings established low-keV VMIs as the optimal imaging choice for evaluating colorectal neoplasms. Although MPR reconstruction improved PEI performance in OA views (accuracy: 77.07%), VMIs at 40-50 keV consistently outperformed both PEIs and higher-energy VMIs, particularly in the accurate delineation of early-stage tumors (T1-2).

Footnotes

Provenance and peer review: Unsolicited article; Externally peer reviewed.

Peer-review model: Single blind

Specialty type: Gastroenterology and hepatology

Country of origin: China

Peer-review report’s classification

Scientific Quality: Grade A, Grade B, Grade C

Novelty: Grade B, Grade B, Grade C

Creativity or Innovation: Grade C, Grade C, Grade C

Scientific Significance: Grade B, Grade B, Grade B

P-Reviewer: Hameed Y, PhD, Assistant Professor, Postdoctoral Fellow, Pakistan; Masood Z, PhD, PharmD, Professor, Pakistan; Wang LT, PhD, Researcher, China S-Editor: Lin C L-Editor: Webster JR P-Editor: Wang CH

References
1.  Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2024;74:229-263.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 5690]  [Cited by in RCA: 8160]  [Article Influence: 8160.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (2)]
2.  Benson AB, Venook AP, Adam M, Chang G, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen SA, Cooper HS, Deming D, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Haste P, Hecht JR, Hoffe S, Hunt S, Hussan H, Johung KL, Joseph N, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Malla M, Maratt JK, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Overman MJ, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen K, Saltz L, Schneider C, Shibata D, Shogan B, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Tavakkoli A, Willett CG, Wu C, Gurski LA, Snedeker J, Jones F. Colon Cancer, Version 3.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2024;22:e240029.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 37]  [Cited by in RCA: 63]  [Article Influence: 63.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
3.  Benson AB, Venook AP, Adam M, Chang G, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen SA, Cooper HS, Deming D, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Haste P, Hecht JR, Hoffe S, Hunt S, Hussan H, Johung KL, Joseph N, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Malla M, Maratt JK, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen K, Saltz L, Schneider C, Shibata D, Shogan B, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Tavakkoli A, Willett CG, Wu C, Jones F, Gurski L. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 3.2024. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2024;22:366-375.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 34]  [Cited by in RCA: 59]  [Article Influence: 59.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
4.  Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, Byrd DR, Brookland RK, Washington MK, Gershenwald JE, Compton CC, Hess KR, Sullivan DC, Jessup JM, Brierley JD, Gaspar LE, Schilsky RL, Balch CM, Winchester DP, Asare EA, Madera M, Gress DM, Meyer LR.   AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 8th ed. New York: Springer, 2017.  [PubMed]  [DOI]
5.  Chen L, Liu X, Zhang W, Qin S, Wang Y, Lin J, Chen Q, Liu G. The predictive value of tumor volume reduction ratio on three-dimensional endorectal ultrasound for tumor response to chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Ann Transl Med. 2022;10:666.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in RCA: 4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
6.  Haji A, Ryan S, Bjarnason I, Donaldson N, Papagrigoriadis S. Colonoscopic high frequency mini-probe ultrasound is more accurate than conventional computed tomography in the local staging of colonic cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14:953-959.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 11]  [Cited by in RCA: 13]  [Article Influence: 1.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
7.  Al-Sukhni E, Milot L, Fruitman M, Beyene J, Victor JC, Schmocker S, Brown G, McLeod R, Kennedy E. Diagnostic accuracy of MRI for assessment of T category, lymph node metastases, and circumferential resection margin involvement in patients with rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:2212-2223.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 348]  [Cited by in RCA: 396]  [Article Influence: 30.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
8.  Hunter C, Blake H, Jeyadevan N, Abulafi M, Swift I, Toomey P, Brown G. Local staging and assessment of colon cancer with 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Radiol. 2016;89:20160257.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 12]  [Cited by in RCA: 22]  [Article Influence: 2.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
9.  Bai LN, Zhang LX. Effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging and spiral computed tomography in the staging and treatment prognosis of colorectal cancer. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024;16:2135-2144.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Reference Citation Analysis (5)]
10.  Maksim R, Buczyńska A, Sidorkiewicz I, Krętowski AJ, Sierko E. Imaging and Metabolic Diagnostic Methods in the Stage Assessment of Rectal Cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2024;16:2553.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
11.  Yuan J, Jin C, Si J, Liu B, Si X, Chen J. High-performance CT features supporting accurate pre-operative tumor staging in colon cancer. Front Oncol. 2025;15:1549075.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
12.  Dighe S, Swift I, Brown G. CT staging of colon cancer. Clin Radiol. 2008;63:1372-1379.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 29]  [Cited by in RCA: 37]  [Article Influence: 2.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
13.  Flor N, Mezzanzanica M, Rigamonti P, Rocco EG, Bosari S, Ceretti AP, Soldi S, Peri M, Sardanelli F, Cornalba GP. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography colonography in preoperative distinction between T1-T2 and T3-T4 staging of colon cancer. Acad Radiol. 2013;20:590-595.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 15]  [Cited by in RCA: 23]  [Article Influence: 1.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
14.  Morimoto T, Yamada T, Miyakawa K, Nakajima Y. Factors associated with pericolic fat stranding of colon cancer on computed tomography colonography. Acta Radiol Open. 2018;7:2058460118757578.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 1]  [Article Influence: 0.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
15.  Dar RA, Chowdri NA, Parray FQ, Shaheen F, Wani SH, Mushtaque M. Pre-operative staging of rectal cancer using multi-detector row computed tomography with multiplanar reformations: single center experience. Indian J Cancer. 2014;51:170-175.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 5]  [Cited by in RCA: 6]  [Article Influence: 0.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
16.  Ahmetoğlu A, Cansu A, Baki D, Kul S, Cobanoğlu U, Alhan E, Ozdemir F. MDCT with multiplanar reconstruction in the preoperative local staging of rectal tumor. Abdom Imaging. 2011;36:31-37.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 23]  [Cited by in RCA: 21]  [Article Influence: 1.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
17.  Komono A, Shida D, Iinuma G, Tsukamoto S, Sakamoto R, Moritani K, Miyake M, Kanemitsu Y. Preoperative T staging of colon cancer using CT colonography with multiplanar reconstruction: new diagnostic criteria based on "bordering vessels". Int J Colorectal Dis. 2019;34:641-648.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 6]  [Cited by in RCA: 12]  [Article Influence: 2.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
18.  Shida D, Iinuma G, Komono A, Ochiai H, Tsukamoto S, Miyake M, Kanemitsu Y. Preoperative T staging using CT colonography with multiplanar reconstruction for very low rectal cancer. BMC Cancer. 2017;17:764.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 9]  [Cited by in RCA: 11]  [Article Influence: 1.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
19.  Zhou XC, Chen QL, Huang CQ, Liao HL, Ren CY, He QS. The clinical application value of multi-slice spiral CT enhanced scans combined with multiplanar reformations images in preoperative T staging of rectal cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98:e16374.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 5]  [Article Influence: 0.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
20.  McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, Fletcher JG. Dual- and Multi-Energy CT: Principles, Technical Approaches, and Clinical Applications. Radiology. 2015;276:637-653.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 790]  [Cited by in RCA: 1076]  [Article Influence: 107.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
21.  Morgan DE. The Role of Dual-Energy Computed Tomography in Assessment of Abdominal Oncology and Beyond. Radiol Clin North Am. 2018;56:565-585.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 10]  [Cited by in RCA: 17]  [Article Influence: 2.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
22.  Arico' FM, Trimarchi R, Portaluri A, Barilla' C, Migliaccio N, Bucolo GM, Cicero G, Sofia C, Booz C, Vogl TJ, Marino MA, Ascenti V, D'Angelo T, Mazziotti S, Ascenti G. Virtual monoenergetic dual-layer dual-energy CT images in colorectal cancer: CT diagnosis could be improved? Radiol Med. 2023;128:891-899.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 16]  [Cited by in RCA: 15]  [Article Influence: 7.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
23.  Chen Y, Liu X, Zeng H, Zhang J, Li Z, Wu B, Huang Z, Song B. The clinical applications of dual-layer spectral detector CT in digestive system diseases. Eur Radiol. 2025;35:3547-3557.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
24.  Tezcan D, Türkvatan A, Türkoğlu MA, Bostancı EB, Sakaoğullları Z. Preoperative staging of colorectal cancer: accuracy of single portal venous phase multidetector computed tomography. Clin Imaging. 2013;37:1048-1053.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 8]  [Cited by in RCA: 12]  [Article Influence: 1.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
25.  Graafen D, Stoehr F, Halfmann MC, Emrich T, Foerster F, Yang Y, Düber C, Müller L, Kloeckner R. Quantum iterative reconstruction on a photon-counting detector CT improves the quality of hepatocellular carcinoma imaging. Cancer Imaging. 2023;23:69.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
26.  Rajiah P, Parakh A, Kay F, Baruah D, Kambadakone AR, Leng S. Update on Multienergy CT: Physics, Principles, and Applications. Radiographics. 2020;40:1284-1308.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 20]  [Cited by in RCA: 22]  [Article Influence: 4.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
27.  Tatsugami F, Higaki T, Nakamura Y, Honda Y, Awai K. Dual-energy CT: minimal essentials for radiologists. Jpn J Radiol. 2022;40:547-559.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in RCA: 54]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
28.  Kalisz K, Rassouli N, Dhanantwari A, Jordan D, Rajiah P. Noise characteristics of virtual monoenergetic images from a novel detector-based spectral CT scanner. Eur J Radiol. 2018;98:118-125.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 37]  [Cited by in RCA: 56]  [Article Influence: 7.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
29.  Kalender WA, Klotz E, Kostaridou L. An algorithm for noise suppression in dual energy CT material density images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1988;7:218-224.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 159]  [Cited by in RCA: 142]  [Article Influence: 3.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
30.  Chang W, Lee JM, Lee K, Yoon JH, Yu MH, Han JK, Choi BI. Assessment of a model-based, iterative reconstruction algorithm (MBIR) regarding image quality and dose reduction in liver computed tomography. Invest Radiol. 2013;48:598-606.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 108]  [Cited by in RCA: 116]  [Article Influence: 10.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
31.  Li J, Wang YH, Zheng FL, Chen XY, Lin Y, Zhu CR, Wu YF, Xu Q, Jin ZY, Xue HD. Feasibility of utilizing ultra-low-dose contrast medium for pancreatic artery depiction using the combination of advanced virtual monoenergetic imaging and high-concentration contrast medium: an intra-patient study. Insights Imaging. 2021;12:166.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 1]  [Article Influence: 0.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
32.  El Kayal N, Mohallel A, Maintz D, Eid M, Emara DM. Improved detectability of hypoattenuating focal pancreatic lesions by dual-layer computed tomography using virtual monoenergetic images. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2020;51:146.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
33.  Jia Z, Guo L, Yuan W, Dai J, Lu J, Li Z, Du X, Chen W, Liu X. Performance of dual-layer spectrum CT virtual monoenergetic images to assess early rectal adenocarcinoma T-stage: comparison with MR. Insights Imaging. 2024;15:11.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 3]  [Cited by in RCA: 5]  [Article Influence: 5.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
34.  Zeina AR, Mahamid A, Walid S, Nachtigal A, Shapira-Rootman M. The diagnostic accuracy of pericolonic fat extension and attenuation for colorectal tumors. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84:1724-1728.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 1]  [Article Influence: 0.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
35.  Qin M, Liu M, Huang R, Gong M, Huang H, Wei X, Wei H, Lu W, Ding K. Preoperative T-staging of Colorectal Cancer by Dual-energy Computed Tomography: A Retrospective Study. Curr Med Imaging. 2024;20:1-7.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
36.  Sun Q, Bian X, Sun D, Wang M, Dong H, Dai X, Fan G, Zhang L, Li Y, Chen G. The value of preoperative diagnosis of colorectal adenocarcinoma pathological T staging based on dual-layer spectral-detector computed tomography extracellular volume fraction: a preliminary study. Jpn J Radiol. 2024;42:612-621.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
37.  Liu X, Chen XL, Yuan Y, Pu H, Li H. Dual-energy CT quantitative parameters for prediction of prognosis in patients with resectable rectal cancer. Eur Radiol. 2025;35:4945-4956.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
38.  Hennedige T, Teo L, Ang B, Cheong WK, Venkatesh SK. Accuracy of preoperative CT for local staging in colorectal carcinomas. Singapore Med J. 2010;51:475-480.  [PubMed]  [DOI]
39.  Komono A, Kajitani R, Matsumoto Y, Nagano H, Yoshimatsu G, Aisu N, Urakawa H, Hasegawa S. Preoperative T staging of advanced colorectal cancer by computed tomography colonography. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2021;36:2489-2496.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 7]  [Article Influence: 1.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
40.  Bompou E, Vassiou A, Baloyiannis I, Perivoliotis K, Fezoulidis I, Tzovaras G. Comparative evaluation of CT and MRI in the preoperative staging of colon cancer. Sci Rep. 2024;14:17145.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
41.  Maupoey Ibáñez J, Pàmies Guilabert J, Frasson M, Boscà Robledo A, Giner Segura F, García-Granero Ximénez E. Accuracy of CT colonography in the preoperative staging of colon cancer: a prospective study of 217 patients. Colorectal Dis. 2019;21:1151-1163.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 12]  [Cited by in RCA: 22]  [Article Influence: 3.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
42.  Bai RJ, Ren SH, Jiang HJ, Li JP, Liu XC, Xue LM. Accuracy of Multi-Slice Spiral Computed Tomography for Preoperative Tumor Node Metastasis (TNM) Staging of Colorectal Carcinoma. Med Sci Monit. 2017;23:3470-3479.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 6]  [Cited by in RCA: 8]  [Article Influence: 1.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
43.  Park HS, Lee JM, Kim SH, Lee JY, Yang HK, Han JK, Choi BI. Three-dimensional MDCT for preoperative local staging of gastric cancer using gas and water distention methods: a retrospective cohort study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:1316-1323.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 22]  [Cited by in RCA: 24]  [Article Influence: 1.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
44.  Lao IH, Chao H, Wang YJ, Mak CW, Tzeng WS, Wu RH, Chang ST, Fang JL. Computed tomography has low sensitivity for the diagnosis of early colon cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:807-811.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 17]  [Cited by in RCA: 23]  [Article Influence: 1.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
45.  Nagayama Y, Iyama A, Oda S, Taguchi N, Nakaura T, Utsunomiya D, Kikuchi Y, Yamashita Y. Dual-layer dual-energy computed tomography for the assessment of hypovascular hepatic metastases: impact of closing k-edge on image quality and lesion detectability. Eur Radiol. 2019;29:2837-2847.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 17]  [Cited by in RCA: 46]  [Article Influence: 6.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
46.  Pan X, Wu Z, Zhao J, Zhang X, Zhang X, Tang L, Yang J, Deng K. Early rectal neoplasm in dual-layer spectral detector computed tomography: dual-layer spectral computed tomography (CT) images improve tumor detection and staging. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2024;14:8260-8271.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
47.  Zoico E, Rizzatti V, Darra E, Budui SL, Franceschetti G, Vinante F, Pedrazzani C, Guglielmi A, De Manzoni G, Mazzali G, Rossi AP, Fantin F, Zamboni M. Morphological and Functional Changes in the Peritumoral Adipose Tissue of Colorectal Cancer Patients. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2017;25 Suppl 2:S87-S94.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 17]  [Cited by in RCA: 24]  [Article Influence: 3.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
48.  Franco PN, Spasiano CM, Maino C, De Ponti E, Ragusi M, Giandola T, Terrani S, Peroni M, Corso R, Ippolito D. Principles and Applications of Dual-Layer Spectral CT in Gastrointestinal Imaging. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023;13:1740.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
49.  Hirata Y, Nozawa H, Murono K, Kawai K, Hata K, Tanaka T, Nishikawa T, Otani K, Sasaki K, Kaneko M. Over-diagnosis for preoperative T staging of colorectal cancer - A case series. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2018;32:10-13.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 2]  [Cited by in RCA: 2]  [Article Influence: 0.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
50.  Soyluoglu S, Ozdemir Gunay B. Contribution of Metabolic Parameters and Pericolic Fat Stranding on Preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT in Predicting Post-operative Histopathology and Outcome in Colorectal Cancer. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023;57:223-234.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 2]  [Cited by in RCA: 2]  [Article Influence: 1.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
51.  You KY, Huang R, Zhang LN, Ding PR, Xiao WW, Qiu B, Chang H, Zeng ZF, Pan ZZ, Gao YH. Tailored selection of the interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer: analysis based on the pathologic stage or chemoradiation response. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2015;141:719-728.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 11]  [Cited by in RCA: 9]  [Article Influence: 0.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
52.  Cohen R, Raeisi M, Chibaudel B, Yothers G, Goldberg RM, Bachet JB, Wolmark N, Yoshino T, Schmoll HJ, Haller DG, Kerr R, Lonardi S, George TJ, Shacham-Shmueli E, Shi Q, André T, de Gramont A. Impact of tumor and node stages on the efficacy of adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in stage III colon cancer patients: an ACCENT pooled analysis. ESMO Open. 2025;10:104481.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
53.  Huh JW, Jeong YY, Kim HR, Kim YJ. Prognostic value of preoperative radiological staging assessed by computed tomography in patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:1198-1206.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 27]  [Cited by in RCA: 30]  [Article Influence: 2.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
54.  Choo JM, Baek SJ, Kwak JM, Kim J, Kim SH. Clinical characteristics and oncologic outcomes in patients with preoperative clinical T3 and T4 colon cancer who were staged as pathologic T3. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2020;99:37-43.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 4]  [Cited by in RCA: 4]  [Article Influence: 0.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]