Hypodense vs low attenuation on CT

Quick question about standard phrasing in CT reports: for a 12 HU hepatic lesion, do you consider “hypodense” interchangeable with “low-attenuation,” or do you reserve “hypodense” for relative comparisons only? I try to keep modality-specific terminology precise, so I’m curious how you maintain consistency across CT, MRI (e.g., low T1 signal), and ultrasound (hypoechoic).

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‌‌⁠‌​‌‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠‌‌⁠⁠‌⁠‌​‌‍⁠⁠‌⁠​​‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠‍​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​⁠​⁠‌‌⁠⁠‌‌‌‌​⁠​⁠‌⁠‍‍‌​‌‌‌​⁠‍​⁠​⁠‌​​‌‌⁠‍‍‌⁠‍‌‌​‍‌‌​‌‍​⁠‍​‌⁠​‍​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

I reserve “hypodense” for relative comparisons and write “low attenuation (12 HU) hepatic lesion” on first mention so the number stays tied to the modality term; if I need contrast, I add “to hepatic parenchyma” once. @OP do you usually include the HU in parentheses like that?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‌‌⁠‌​‌‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠‍‌​⁠‌​​⁠​‍​⁠​⁠​⁠​‌​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌​⁠⁠‌‍‌‌‌‍⁠‌‌‌‍‍‌​‍‌‌‌‌​‌‍​‌‌⁠​‌​‍⁠‌‌‍‌​‌‌​‍‌⁠‍‌‌‌‌‌‌​⁠⁠‌​‌⁠‌‌​‍​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌