Paolo Ricci

Prof. Dr. Paolo Ricci

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

23Years (2004-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 April 2008 in Pediatric Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LPLucia Pacifico
Lucia Pacifico
VCVito Cantisani
Vito Cantisani
PRPaolo Ricci
Paolo Ricci
JOJohn F Osborn
John F Osborn
ESElisa Schiavo
Elisa Schiavo
Claudio ChiesaClaudio Chiesa
Claudio Chiesa

1 March 2014 in European Journal of Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
VCVito Cantisani
Vito Cantisani
PLPietro Lodise
Pietro Lodise
HGHektor Grazhdani
Hektor Grazhdani
EMEster Mancuso
Ester Mancuso
EMElena Maggini
Elena Maggini
CCCarlo Catalano
Carlo Catalano

1 March 2014 in European Journal of Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PRPaolo Ricci
Paolo Ricci
EMElena Maggini
Elena Maggini
EMEster Mancuso
Ester Mancuso
PLPietro Lodise
Pietro Lodise
VCVito Cantisani
Vito Cantisani
CCCarlo CATALANO
Carlo CATALANO

1 January 2007 in Ultraschall in der Medizin - European Journal of Ultrasound
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PRPaolo Ricci
Paolo Ricci
VCVito Cantisani
Vito Cantisani
LBL Ballesio
L Ballesio
EPE Pagliara
E Pagliara
ESE Sallusti
E Sallusti
RPR Passariello
R Passariello
Ziel: Die Aussagekraft der kontrastmittelgestützten Real-Time-B-Bild-Sonografie (CEUS) mit niedrigem mechanischen Index (MI) bei der Differenzierung von Brusttumoren im Vergleich mit MRT zu überprüfen. Material und Methoden: 50 Brusttumoren, die vorher durch Mammographie oder konventionellen Ultraschall entdeckt worden waren, wurden durch CEUS und MRT untersucht. Kontrastmitteluntersuchungen wurden mit einem speziellen Gerät (Esatune, Esaote, Genoa, Italien) vor und nach der Injektion von 4,8 ml Sonovue (Bracco, Milan, Italien) durchgeführt. Das MRT wurde mit einem 1,5-T-Gerät (Siemens Vision Plus, Erlangen, Deutschland) angefertigt mit spezieller bilateraler oberflächlicher Spule, mit T2w STIR und 3D Flash T1w vor und 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Minuten nach der Gabe von Kontrastmittel (Gd-DTPA, 1.5 ml/Kg). Die Wash-in- und Wash-out-Kurven für beide Verfahren wurden analysiert. Für die Sonografie wurde eine spezielle Quantifizierungs-Software eingesetzt (Qontrast, Bracco, Mailand, Italien), die sich auf die Pixel-zu-Pixel-Zeitintensitätskurve stützt, um für jeden Tumor eine Map der sonographischen kontrastmittelverstärkten Perfusion zu erhalten. Der McNemar-Test wurde sodann zur Kalkulation eingesetzt. Ergebnisse: Es wurden 24 duktale Karzinome, 18 Fibroadenome, 4 fibrozystische Dysplasien, 1 muzinöses Karzinom, 1 invasives dukto-lobuläres Karzinom, 1 intraduktale floride Papillomatose and 1 Phylloides-Tumor diagnostiziert. Die Muster der kontrastverstärkten Sonografie korrelierten gut mit den MRT-Ergebnissen. Sensitivität, Spezifität und Genauigkeit des US betrugen: 69,2 %, 66,7 %, und 68 %. Anhand der verschiedenen Kontrastverstärkungsmuster und der hieraus sich ergebenden Perfusions-Maps wurden alle malignen und 9 der 12 benignen Tumoren richtig diagnostiziert, was eine Spezifität von 87,5 % und eine Sensitivität von 100 % bedeutete. Hinsichtlich der Spezifität besteht kein Unterschied zwischen US und CEUS mit dem McNemar-Test (p = 0,18). Was die Sensitivität angeht, ist der Unterschied zwischen kontrastverstärkter Sonografie und normaler Sonografie signifikant (McNemar-Test: p = 0,013). Die drei Läsionen, die falsch als maligne klassifiziert wurden, waren zwei hypervaskularisierte Fibroadenome bei jungen Frauen und ein Phylloides-Tumor. Schlussfolgerung: CEUS scheint eine verlässliche Methode für die Differenzierung von Brusttumoren darzustellen, da er typische Enhancementmuster produziert. Die Perfusionskurven der Kontrastsonographie zeigen eine gute Korrelation mit den MRT-Wash-in- und -Wash-out-Kurven. Purpose: To assess the efficacy of low mechanical index (MI) real time grey scale contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) in the differentiation of breast lesions in comparison to Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Materials and Methods: 50 lesions previously detected at mammography or conventional US were evaluated by means of CEUS and MRI. Contrast-enhanced examinations were performed with a dedicated equipment (Esatune, Esaote, Genoa, Italy), before and after injection of 4.8 ml of Sonovue (Bracco, Milan, Italy). MRI was conducted with a 1.5 T equipment (Siemens Vision Plus, Erlangen, Germany) with bilateral dedicated superficial coil, on T2w STIR and 3D Flash T1w before and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 minutes after the administration of contrast agent (Gd-DTPA, 1.5 ml/Kg). Wash-in and wash-out curves were assessed for both procedures. A specific sonographic quantification software (Qontrast, Bracco, Milan, Italy), based on pixel by pixel signal intensity over time, was used to obtain contrast-enhanced sonographic perfusion maps for each lesion. Mc Nemar test was then calculated. Results: 24 invasive ductal carcinomas, 18 fibroadenomas, 4 fibro-cystic dysplasias, 1 mucinous carcinoma, 1 invasive ducto-lobular carcinoma, 1 intraductal florid papillomatosis and 1 phylloides tumour were diagnosed. Contrast-enhanced sonographic patterns correlated well with those provided by MRI. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of US were: 69.2 %, 66.7 %, and 68 %, respectively. According to the different contrast enhancement patterns and the resulting perfusion maps, all the malignant lesions and 9 out of 12 benign lesions were correctly diagnosed, thus resulting in 87.5 % of specificity and 100 % of sensitivity. Regarding the specificity, there is no difference between US and CEUS with McNemar (p = 0.18). Regarding sensitivity, the difference between contrast-enhanced US and US is significant as calculated with McNemar test (p = 0.013). The three lesions which were incorrectly classified as malignant were two hypervascularised fibroadenomas in young women and a phylloides tumour. Conclusion: CEUS seems to be a reliable method to differentiate breast lesions, since it provides typical enhancement patterns. Contrast sonographic perfusion curves correlate well with MRI wash in - wash out curves.

9 August 2021 in La radiologia medica
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SBStefano Bracci
Stefano Bracci
MDMiriam Dolciami
Miriam Dolciami
CTClaudio Trobiani
Claudio Trobiani
AIAntonella Izzo
Antonella Izzo
APAngelina Pernazza
Angelina Pernazza
PRPaolo Ricci
Paolo Ricci
Purpose: The assessment of Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression has become a game changer in the treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to investigate the ability of Radiomics applied to computed tomography (CT) in predicting PD-L1 expression in patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: By applying texture analysis, we retrospectively analyzed 72 patients with advanced NSCLC. The datasets were randomly split into a training cohort (2/3) and a validation cohort (1/3). Forty radiomic features were extracted by manually drawing tumor volumes of interest (VOIs) on baseline contrast-enhanced CT. After selecting features on the training cohort, two predictive models were created using binary logistic regression, one for PD-L1 values ≥ 50% and the other for values between 1 and 49%. The two models were analyzed with ROC curves and tested in the validation cohort. Results: The Radiomic Score (Rad-Score) for PD-L1 values ≥ 50%, which consisted of Skewness and Low Gray-Level Zone Emphasis (GLZLM_LGZE), presented a cut-off value of − 0.745 with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.811 and 0.789 in the training and validation cohort, respectively. The Rad-Score for PD-L1 values between 1 and 49% consisted of Sphericity, Skewness, Conv_Q3 and Gray Level Non-Uniformity (GLZLM_GLNU), showing a cut-off value of 0.111 with AUC of 0.763 and 0.806 in the two population, respectively. Conclusion: Rad-Scores obtained from CT texture analysis could be useful for predicting PD-L1 expression and guiding the therapeutic choice in patients with advanced NSCLC.

1 September 2020 in European Journal of Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ALAndrea Leonardi
Andrea Leonardi
RSRoberto Scipione
Roberto Scipione
GAGiulia Alfieri
Giulia Alfieri
RPRoberta Petrillo
Roberta Petrillo
MDMiriam Dolciami
Miriam Dolciami
PRPaolo Ricci
Paolo Ricci