1
|
Guedes Pinto E, Penha D, Ravara S, Monaghan C, Hochhegger B, Marchiori E, Taborda-Barata L, Irion K. Factors influencing the outcome of volumetry tools for pulmonary nodule analysis: a systematic review and attempted meta-analysis. Insights Imaging 2023; 14:152. [PMID: 37741928 PMCID: PMC10517915 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-023-01480-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2023] [Accepted: 07/08/2023] [Indexed: 09/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Health systems worldwide are implementing lung cancer screening programmes to identify early-stage lung cancer and maximise patient survival. Volumetry is recommended for follow-up of pulmonary nodules and outperforms other measurement methods. However, volumetry is known to be influenced by multiple factors. The objectives of this systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42022370233) are to summarise the current knowledge regarding factors that influence volumetry tools used in the analysis of pulmonary nodules, assess for significant clinical impact, identify gaps in current knowledge and suggest future research. Five databases (Medline, Scopus, Journals@Ovid, Embase and Emcare) were searched on the 21st of September, 2022, and 137 original research studies were included, explicitly testing the potential impact of influencing factors on the outcome of volumetry tools. The summary of these studies is tabulated, and a narrative review is provided. A subset of studies (n = 16) reporting clinical significance were selected, and their results were combined, if appropriate, using meta-analysis. Factors with clinical significance include the segmentation algorithm, quality of the segmentation, slice thickness, the level of inspiration for solid nodules, and the reconstruction algorithm and kernel in subsolid nodules. Although there is a large body of evidence in this field, it is unclear how to apply the results from these studies in clinical practice as most studies do not test for clinical relevance. The meta-analysis did not improve our understanding due to the small number and heterogeneity of studies testing for clinical significance. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Many studies have investigated the influencing factors of pulmonary nodule volumetry, but only 11% of these questioned their clinical relevance in their management. The heterogeneity among these studies presents a challenge in consolidating results and clinical application of the evidence. KEY POINTS: • Factors influencing the volumetry of pulmonary nodules have been extensively investigated. • Just 11% of studies test clinical significance (wrongly diagnosing growth). • Nodule size interacts with most other influencing factors (especially for smaller nodules). • Heterogeneity among studies makes comparison and consolidation of results challenging. • Future research should focus on clinical applicability, screening, and updated technology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erique Guedes Pinto
- R. Marquês de Ávila E Bolama, Universidade da Beira Interior Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde, 6201-001, Covilhã, Portugal.
| | - Diana Penha
- R. Marquês de Ávila E Bolama, Universidade da Beira Interior Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde, 6201-001, Covilhã, Portugal
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Thomas Dr, Liverpool, L14 3PE, UK
| | - Sofia Ravara
- R. Marquês de Ávila E Bolama, Universidade da Beira Interior Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde, 6201-001, Covilhã, Portugal
| | - Colin Monaghan
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Thomas Dr, Liverpool, L14 3PE, UK
| | | | - Edson Marchiori
- Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal Do Rio de Janeiro, Bloco K - Av. Carlos Chagas Filho, 373 - 2º Andar, Sala 49 - Cidade Universitária da Universidade Federal Do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro - RJ, 21044-020, Brasil
- Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Av. Marquês Do Paraná, 303 - Centro, Niterói - RJ, 24220-000, Brasil
| | - Luís Taborda-Barata
- R. Marquês de Ávila E Bolama, Universidade da Beira Interior Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde, 6201-001, Covilhã, Portugal
| | - Klaus Irion
- Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Rd, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Peters AA, Christe A, von Stackelberg O, Pohl M, Kauczor HU, Heußel CP, Wielpütz MO, Ebner L. "Will I change nodule management recommendations if I change my CAD system?"-impact of volumetric deviation between different CAD systems on lesion management. Eur Radiol 2023; 33:5568-5577. [PMID: 36894752 PMCID: PMC10326095 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09525-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2022] [Revised: 11/17/2022] [Accepted: 02/05/2023] [Indexed: 03/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate and compare the measurement accuracy of two different computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems regarding artificial pulmonary nodules and assess the clinical impact of volumetric inaccuracies in a phantom study. METHODS In this phantom study, 59 different phantom arrangements with 326 artificial nodules (178 solid, 148 ground-glass) were scanned at 80 kV, 100 kV, and 120 kV. Four different nodule diameters were used: 5 mm, 8 mm, 10 mm, and 12 mm. Scans were analyzed by a deep-learning (DL)-based CAD and a standard CAD system. Relative volumetric errors (RVE) of each system vs. ground truth and the relative volume difference (RVD) DL-based vs. standard CAD were calculated. The Bland-Altman method was used to define the limits of agreement (LOA). The hypothetical impact on LungRADS classification was assessed for both systems. RESULTS There was no difference between the three voltage groups regarding nodule volumetry. Regarding the solid nodules, the RVE of the 5-mm-, 8-mm-, 10-mm-, and 12-mm-size groups for the DL CAD/standard CAD were 12.2/2.8%, 1.3/ - 2.8%, - 3.6/1.5%, and - 12.2/ - 0.3%, respectively. The corresponding values for the ground-glass nodules (GGN) were 25.6%/81.0%, 9.0%/28.0%, 7.6/20.6%, and 6.8/21.2%. The mean RVD for solid nodules/GGN was 1.3/ - 15.2%. Regarding the LungRADS classification, 88.5% and 79.8% of all solid nodules were correctly assigned by the DL CAD and the standard CAD, respectively. 14.9% of the nodules were assigned differently between the systems. CONCLUSIONS Patient management may be affected by the volumetric inaccuracy of the CAD systems and hence demands supervision and/or manual correction by a radiologist. KEY POINTS • The DL-based CAD system was more accurate in the volumetry of GGN and less accurate regarding solid nodules than the standard CAD system. • Nodule size and attenuation have an effect on the measurement accuracy of both systems; tube voltage has no effect on measurement accuracy. • Measurement inaccuracies of CAD systems can have an impact on patient management, which demands supervision by radiologists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan A Peters
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 672, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), German Lung Research Center (DZL), Marsilius-Arkaden 130, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology With Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Roentgenstrasse 1, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Freiburgstrasse, Switzerland.
| | - Andreas Christe
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Freiburgstrasse, Switzerland
| | - Oyunbileg von Stackelberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 672, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), German Lung Research Center (DZL), Marsilius-Arkaden 130, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology With Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Roentgenstrasse 1, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Moritz Pohl
- Institute of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hans-Ulrich Kauczor
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 672, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), German Lung Research Center (DZL), Marsilius-Arkaden 130, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology With Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Roentgenstrasse 1, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Claus Peter Heußel
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 672, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), German Lung Research Center (DZL), Marsilius-Arkaden 130, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology With Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Roentgenstrasse 1, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Mark O Wielpütz
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 672, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), German Lung Research Center (DZL), Marsilius-Arkaden 130, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology With Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Roentgenstrasse 1, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Lukas Ebner
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Freiburgstrasse, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Jungblut L, Blüthgen C, Polacin M, Messerli M, Schmidt B, Euler A, Alkadhi H, Frauenfelder T, Martini K. First Performance Evaluation of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Aided Detection System for Pulmonary Nodule Evaluation in Dual-Source Photon-Counting Detector CT at Different Low-Dose Levels. Invest Radiol 2022; 57:108-114. [PMID: 34324462 DOI: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000814] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the image quality (IQ) and performance of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based computer-aided detection (CAD) system in photon-counting detector computed tomography (PCD-CT) for pulmonary nodule evaluation at different low-dose levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS An anthropomorphic chest-phantom containing 14 pulmonary nodules of different sizes (range, 3-12 mm) was imaged on a PCD-CT and on a conventional energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT). Scans were performed with each of the 3 vendor-specific scanning modes (QuantumPlus [Q+], Quantum [Q], and High Resolution [HR]) at decreasing matched radiation dose levels (volume computed tomography dose index ranging from 1.79 to 0.31 mGy) by adapting IQ levels from 30 to 5. Image noise was measured manually in the chest wall at 8 different locations. Subjective IQ was evaluated by 2 readers in consensus. Nodule detection and volumetry were performed using a commercially available AI-CAD system. RESULTS Subjective IQ was superior in PCD-CT compared with EID-CT (P < 0.001), and objective image noise was similar in the Q+ and Q-mode (P > 0.05) and superior in the HR-mode (PCD 55.8 ± 11.7 HU vs EID 74.8 ± 5.4 HU; P = 0.01). High resolution showed the lowest image noise values among PCD modes (P = 0.01). Overall, the AI-CAD system delivered comparable results for lung nodule detection and volumetry between PCD- and dose-matched EID-CT (P = 0.08-1.00), with a mean sensitivity of 95% for PCD-CT and of 86% for dose-matched EID-CT in the lowest evaluated dose level (IQ5). Q+ and Q-mode showed higher false-positive rates than EID-CT at lower-dose levels (IQ10 and IQ5). The HR-mode showed a sensitivity of 100% with a false-positive rate of 1 even at the lowest evaluated dose level (IQ5; CDTIvol, 0.41 mGy). CONCLUSIONS Photon-counting detector CT was superior to dose-matched EID-CT in subjective IQ while showing comparable to lower objective image noise. Fully automatized AI-aided nodule detection and volumetry are feasible in PCD-CT, but attention has to be paid to false-positive findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Jungblut
- From the Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology
| | | | | | - Michael Messerli
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - Andre Euler
- From the Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology
| | - Hatem Alkadhi
- From the Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Influence of acquisition settings and radiation exposure on CT lung densitometry-An anthropomorphic ex vivo phantom study. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0237434. [PMID: 32797096 PMCID: PMC7428081 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2019] [Accepted: 07/28/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives To systematically evaluate the influence of acquisition settings in conjunction with raw-data based iterative image reconstruction (IR) on lung densitometry based on multi-row detector computed tomography (CT) in an anthropomorphic chest phantom. Materials and methods Ten porcine heart-lung explants were mounted in an ex vivo chest phantom shell, six with highly and four with low attenuating chest wall. CT (Somatom Definition Flash, Siemens Healthineers) was performed at 120kVp and 80kVp, each combined with current-time products of 120, 60, 30, and 12mAs, and was reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and IR (Safire, Siemens Healthineers). Mean lung density (LD), air density (AD) and noise were measured by semi-automated region-of interest (ROI) analysis, with 120kVp/120 mAs serving as the standard of reference. Results Using IR, noise in lung parenchyma was reduced by ~ 31% at high attenuating chest wall and by ~ 22% at low attenuating chest wall compared to FBP, respectively (p<0.05). IR induced changes in the order of ±1 HU to mean absolute LD and AD compared to corresponding FBP reconstructions which were statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusions Densitometry is influenced by acquisition parameters and reconstruction algorithms to a degree that may be clinically negligible. However, in longitudinal studies and clinical research identical protocols and potentially other measures for calibration may be required.
Collapse
|
5
|
Gierada DS, Black WC, Chiles C, Pinsky PF, Yankelevitz DF. Low-Dose CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Evidence from 2 Decades of Study. Radiol Imaging Cancer 2020; 2:e190058. [PMID: 32300760 PMCID: PMC7135238 DOI: 10.1148/rycan.2020190058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2019] [Revised: 10/15/2019] [Accepted: 11/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Lung cancer remains the overwhelmingly greatest cause of cancer death in the United States, accounting for more annual deaths than breast, prostate, and colon cancer combined. Accumulated evidence since the mid to late 1990s, however, indicates that low-dose CT screening of high-risk patients enables detection of lung cancer at an early stage and can reduce the risk of dying from lung cancer. CT screening is now a recommended clinical service in the United States, subject to guidelines and reimbursement requirements intended to standardize practice and optimize the balance of benefits and risks. In this review, the evidence on the effectiveness of CT screening will be summarized and the current guidelines and standards will be described in the context of knowledge gained from lung cancer screening studies. In addition, an overview of the potential advances that may improve CT screening will be presented, and the need to better understand the performance in clinical practice outside of the research trial setting will be discussed. © RSNA, 2020.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David S. Gierada
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S. Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (D.S.G.); Department of Radiology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (W.C.B.); Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC (C.C.); Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (P.F.P.); and Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY (D.F.Y.)
| | - William C. Black
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S. Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (D.S.G.); Department of Radiology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (W.C.B.); Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC (C.C.); Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (P.F.P.); and Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY (D.F.Y.)
| | - Caroline Chiles
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S. Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (D.S.G.); Department of Radiology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (W.C.B.); Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC (C.C.); Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (P.F.P.); and Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY (D.F.Y.)
| | - Paul F. Pinsky
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S. Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (D.S.G.); Department of Radiology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (W.C.B.); Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC (C.C.); Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (P.F.P.); and Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY (D.F.Y.)
| | - David F. Yankelevitz
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S. Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (D.S.G.); Department of Radiology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (W.C.B.); Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC (C.C.); Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (P.F.P.); and Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY (D.F.Y.)
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Effect of Reconstruction Parameters on the Quantitative Analysis of Chest Computed Tomography. J Thorac Imaging 2019; 34:92-102. [DOI: 10.1097/rti.0000000000000389] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
7
|
Weber NM, Koo CW, Yu L, Bartholmai BJ, Halaweish AF, McCollough CH, Fletcher JG. Breathe New Life Into Your Chest CT Exams: Using Advanced Acquisition and Postprocessing Techniques. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2019; 48:152-160. [DOI: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2018.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2018] [Revised: 10/06/2018] [Accepted: 10/16/2018] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
8
|
Accuracy of Pulmonary Nodule Volumetry at Different Exposure Parameters in Low-Dose Computed Tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2019; 43:926-930. [DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000000908] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
9
|
Detection of artificial pulmonary lung nodules in ultralow-dose CT using an ex vivo lung phantom. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0190501. [PMID: 29298331 PMCID: PMC5752031 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2017] [Accepted: 12/16/2017] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Objectives To assess the image quality of 3 different ultralow-dose CT protocols on pulmonary nodule depiction in a ventilated ex vivo-system. Materials and methods Four porcine lungs were inflated inside a dedicated chest phantom and prepared with n = 195 artificial nodules (0.5–1 mL). The artificial chest wall was filled with water to simulate the absorption of a human chest. Images were acquired with a 2x192-row detector CT using low-dose (reference protocol with a tube voltage of 120 kV) and 3 different ULD protocols (respective effective doses: 1mSv and 0.1mSv). A different tube voltage was used for each ULD protocol: 70kV, 100kV with tin filter (100kV_Sn) and 150kV with tin filter (150kV_Sn). Nodule delineation was assessed by two observers (scores 1–5, 1 = unsure, 5 = high confidence). Results The diameter of the 195 detected artificial nodules ranged from 0.9–21.5 mm (mean 7.84 mm ± 5.31). The best ULD scores were achieved using 100kV_Sn and 70 kV ULD protocols (4.14 and 4.06 respectively). Both protocols were not significantly different (p = 0.244). The mean score of 3.78 in ULD 150kV_Sn was significantly lower compared to the 100kV_Sn ULD protocol (p = 0.008). Conclusion The results of this experiment, conducted in a realistic setting show the feasibility of ultralow-dose CT for the detection of pulmonary nodules.
Collapse
|
10
|
Rydzak CE, Armato SG, Avila RS, Mulshine JL, Yankelevitz DF, Gierada DS. Quality assurance and quantitative imaging biomarkers in low-dose CT lung cancer screening. Br J Radiol 2017; 91:20170401. [PMID: 28830225 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170401] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
After years of assessment through controlled clinical trials, low-dose CT screening for lung cancer is becoming part of clinical practice. As with any cancer screening test, those undergoing lung cancer screening are not being evaluated for concerning signs or symptoms, but are generally in good health and proactively trying to prevent premature death. Given the resultant obligation to achieve the screening aim of early diagnosis while also minimizing the potential for morbidity from workup of indeterminate but ultimately benign screening abnormalities, careful implementation of screening with conformance to currently recognized best practices and a focus on quality assurance is essential. In this review, we address the importance of each component of the screening process to optimize the effectiveness of CT screening, discussing options for quality assurance at each step. We also discuss the potential added advantages, quality assurance requirements and current status of quantitative imaging biomarkers related to lung cancer screening. Finally, we highlight suggestions for improvements and needs for further evidence in evaluating the performance of CT screening as it transitions from the research trial setting into daily clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chara E Rydzak
- 1 Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine , St. Louis, MO , USA
| | - Samuel G Armato
- 2 Department of Radiology, University of Chicago , Chicago, IL , USA
| | | | - James L Mulshine
- 4 Department of Internal Medicine, Rush University , Chicago, IL , USA
| | - David F Yankelevitz
- 5 Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai , New York, NY , USA
| | - David S Gierada
- 1 Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine , St. Louis, MO , USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Leutz-Schmidt P, Weinheimer O, Jobst BJ, Dinkel J, Biederer J, Kauczor HU, Puderbach MU, Wielpütz MO. Influence of exposure parameters and iterative reconstruction on automatic airway segmentation and analysis on MDCT-An ex vivo phantom study. PLoS One 2017; 12:e0182268. [PMID: 28767732 PMCID: PMC5540604 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2017] [Accepted: 07/14/2017] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the influence of exposure parameters and raw-data-based iterative reconstruction (IR) on computer-aided segmentation and quantitative analysis of the tracheobronchial tree on multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). MATERIAL AND METHODS 10 porcine heart-lung-explants were mounted inside a dedicated chest phantom. MDCT was performed at 120kV and 80kV with 120, 60, 30 and 12 mAs each. All scans were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) or IR, resulting in a total of 160 datasets. The maximum number of detected airway segments, most peripheral airway generation detected, generation-specific airway wall thickness (WT), total diameter (TD) and normalized wall thickness (pi10) were compared. RESULTS The number of detected airway segments decreased slightly with dose (324.8±118 at 120kV/120mAs vs. 288.9±130 at 80kV/30mAs with FBP, p<0.05) and was not changed by IR. The 20th generation was constantly detected as most peripheral. WT did not change significantly with exposure parameters and reconstruction algorithm across all generations: range 1st generation 2.4-2.7mm, 5th 1.0-1.1mm, and 10th 0.7mm with FBP; 1st 2.3-2.4mm, 5th 1.0-1.1mm, and 10th 0.7-0.8mm with IR. pi10 was not affected as well (range 0.32-0.34mm). CONCLUSIONS Exposure parameters and IR had no relevant influence on measured airway parameters even for WT <1mm. Thus, no systematic errors would be expected using automatic airway analysis with low-dose MDCT and IR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patricia Leutz-Schmidt
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology with Nuclear Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Weinheimer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology with Nuclear Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Bertram J. Jobst
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology with Nuclear Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Julien Dinkel
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology with Nuclear Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Biederer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
- Radiologie Darmstadt, Gross-Gerau County Hospital, Gross-Gerau, Germany
- Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hans-Ulrich Kauczor
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology with Nuclear Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael U. Puderbach
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology with Nuclear Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Mark O. Wielpütz
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC) Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology with Nuclear Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to evaluate measurement variability in volumetric assessment of pulmonary nodules on low-dose CT images with a view toward determining how this variability is influenced by nodule size. MATERIALS AND METHODS A large CT screening database was reviewed to identify solid pulmonary nodules that had remained stable in size on the basis of findings from at least three scans obtained over a 2-year period. Two software packages (Lung VCAR and syngo.via) were used to assess the nodule volume on the two most recent CT scans, which were obtained at a slice thickness of 0.625 mm. The percentage of volume change was calculated for each nodule. The SD of the percentage of volume change was determined for nodules in each of the following nodule diameter size categories: less than 4 mm, 4-5 mm, 6-9 mm, and 10 mm or larger. The diameter was the mean of the length and width in the CT image that represented the largest cross-sectional area of the nodule. RESULTS The 171 stable nodules that were identified in 117 CT screening participants (median age, 61 years) ranged in size from 2.2 to 18.7 mm. The time between acquisition of the first and last CT images ranged from 3.7 to 17.8 years (median, 11.5 years). For each of the four categories of diameter size (< 4, 4-5, 6-9, and ≥ 10 mm), the SD of the percentage of volume change was 20.4%, 17.7%, 14.6%, and 3.7%, with the use of Lung VCAR, and 59.5%, 24.3%, 9.1%, and 6.2%, with the use of syngo.via, respectively. The SD decreased with increasing nodule diameter, with the use of both software packages. CONCLUSION Measurement variability decreased with increasing nodule diameter for both software packages and was different between the two software packages.
Collapse
|
13
|
Kubo T, Ohno Y, Seo JB, Yamashiro T, Kalender WA, Lee CH, Lynch DA, Kauczor HU, Hatabu H. Securing safe and informative thoracic CT examinations—Progress of radiation dose reduction techniques. Eur J Radiol 2017; 86:313-319. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.10.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2016] [Revised: 10/08/2016] [Accepted: 10/12/2016] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
14
|
Kim H, Park CM, Lee M, Park SJ, Song YS, Lee JH, Hwang EJ, Goo JM. Impact of Reconstruction Algorithms on CT Radiomic Features of Pulmonary Tumors: Analysis of Intra- and Inter-Reader Variability and Inter-Reconstruction Algorithm Variability. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0164924. [PMID: 27741289 PMCID: PMC5065199 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164924] [Citation(s) in RCA: 94] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2016] [Accepted: 10/03/2016] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify the impact of reconstruction algorithms on CT radiomic features of pulmonary tumors and to reveal and compare the intra- and inter-reader and inter-reconstruction algorithm variability of each feature. METHODS Forty-two patients (M:F = 19:23; mean age, 60.43±10.56 years) with 42 pulmonary tumors (22.56±8.51mm) underwent contrast-enhanced CT scans, which were reconstructed with filtered back projection and commercial iterative reconstruction algorithm (level 3 and 5). Two readers independently segmented the whole tumor volume. Fifteen radiomic features were extracted and compared among reconstruction algorithms. Intra- and inter-reader variability and inter-reconstruction algorithm variability were calculated using coefficients of variation (CVs) and then compared. RESULTS Among the 15 features, 5 first-order tumor intensity features and 4 gray level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM)-based features showed significant differences (p<0.05) among reconstruction algorithms. As for the variability, effective diameter, sphericity, entropy, and GLCM entropy were the most robust features (CV≤5%). Inter-reader variability was larger than intra-reader or inter-reconstruction algorithm variability in 9 features. However, for entropy, homogeneity, and 4 GLCM-based features, inter-reconstruction algorithm variability was significantly greater than inter-reader variability (p<0.013). CONCLUSIONS Most of the radiomic features were significantly affected by the reconstruction algorithms. Inter-reconstruction algorithm variability was greater than inter-reader variability for entropy, homogeneity, and GLCM-based features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hyungjin Kim
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Chang Min Park
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
- * E-mail:
| | - Myunghee Lee
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Sang Joon Park
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yong Sub Song
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jong Hyuk Lee
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Eui Jin Hwang
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jin Mo Goo
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Young S, Kim HJG, Ko MM, Ko WW, Flores C, McNitt-Gray MF. Variability in CT lung-nodule volumetry: Effects of dose reduction and reconstruction methods. Med Phys 2016; 42:2679-89. [PMID: 25979066 DOI: 10.1118/1.4918919] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Measuring the size of nodules on chest CT is important for lung cancer staging and measuring therapy response. 3D volumetry has been proposed as a more robust alternative to 1D and 2D sizing methods. There have also been substantial advances in methods to reduce radiation dose in CT. The purpose of this work was to investigate the effect of dose reduction and reconstruction methods on variability in 3D lung-nodule volumetry. METHODS Reduced-dose CT scans were simulated by applying a noise-addition tool to the raw (sinogram) data from clinically indicated patient scans acquired on a multidetector-row CT scanner (Definition Flash, Siemens Healthcare). Scans were simulated at 25%, 10%, and 3% of the dose of their clinical protocol (CTDIvol of 20.9 mGy), corresponding to CTDIvol values of 5.2, 2.1, and 0.6 mGy. Simulated reduced-dose data were reconstructed with both conventional filtered backprojection (B45 kernel) and iterative reconstruction methods (SAFIRE: I44 strength 3 and I50 strength 3). Three lab technologist readers contoured "measurable" nodules in 33 patients under each of the different acquisition/reconstruction conditions in a blinded study design. Of the 33 measurable nodules, 17 were used to estimate repeatability with their clinical reference protocol, as well as interdose and inter-reconstruction-method reproducibilities. The authors compared the resulting distributions of proportional differences across dose and reconstruction methods by analyzing their means, standard deviations (SDs), and t-test and F-test results. RESULTS The clinical-dose repeatability experiment yielded a mean proportional difference of 1.1% and SD of 5.5%. The interdose reproducibility experiments gave mean differences ranging from -5.6% to -1.7% and SDs ranging from 6.3% to 9.9%. The inter-reconstruction-method reproducibility experiments gave mean differences of 2.0% (I44 strength 3) and -0.3% (I50 strength 3), and SDs were identical at 7.3%. For the subset of repeatability cases, inter-reconstruction-method mean/SD pairs were (1.4%, 6.3%) and (-0.7%, 7.2%) for I44 strength 3 and I50 strength 3, respectively. Analysis of representative nodules confirmed that reader variability appeared unaffected by dose or reconstruction method. CONCLUSIONS Lung-nodule volumetry was extremely robust to the radiation-dose level, down to the minimum scanner-supported dose settings. In addition, volumetry was robust to the reconstruction methods used in this study, which included both conventional filtered backprojection and iterative methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Young
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90024
| | - Hyun J Grace Kim
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90024
| | - Moe Moe Ko
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90024
| | - War War Ko
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90024
| | - Carlos Flores
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90024
| | - Michael F McNitt-Gray
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90024
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Advanced imaging tools in pulmonary nodule detection and surveillance. Clin Imaging 2016; 40:296-301. [PMID: 26916752 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2016.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2015] [Revised: 01/27/2016] [Accepted: 01/29/2016] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Lung cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide. The National Lung Screening Trial has demonstrated that lung cancer screening can reduce lung cancer specific and all cause mortality. With approval of national coverage for lung cancer screening, it is expected that an increase in exams related to pulmonary nodule detection and surveillance will ensue. Advanced imaging technologies for nodule detection and surveillance will be more important than ever. While computed tomography (CT) remains the modality of choice, other emerging modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging provides viable alternatives to CT.
Collapse
|
17
|
Pulmonary Nodule Volumetry at Different Low Computed Tomography Radiation Dose Levels With Hybrid and Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2016; 40:578-83. [DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000000408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
18
|
Sakai N, Yabuuchi H, Kondo M, Kojima T, Nagatomo K, Kawanami S, Kamitani T, Yonezawa M, Nagao M, Honda H. Volumetric measurement of artificial pure ground-glass nodules at low-dose CT: Comparisons between hybrid iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection. Eur J Radiol 2015; 84:2654-62. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.08.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2014] [Revised: 07/28/2015] [Accepted: 08/30/2015] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
19
|
Geyer LL, Schoepf UJ, Meinel FG, Nance JW, Bastarrika G, Leipsic JA, Paul NS, Rengo M, Laghi A, De Cecco CN. State of the Art: Iterative CT Reconstruction Techniques. Radiology 2015. [PMID: 26203706 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015132766] [Citation(s) in RCA: 398] [Impact Index Per Article: 44.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Lucas L Geyer
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - U Joseph Schoepf
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - Felix G Meinel
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - John W Nance
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - Gorka Bastarrika
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - Jonathon A Leipsic
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - Narinder S Paul
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - Marco Rengo
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - Andrea Laghi
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| | - Carlo N De Cecco
- From the Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC 29425 (L.L.G., U.J.S., F.G.M., J.W.N., C.N.D.); Department of Radiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont, Canada (G.B.); Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (J.A.L.); Department of Radiology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont, Canada (N.S.P.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (M.R., A.L., C.N.D.)
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Wielpütz MO, Wroblewski J, Lederlin M, Dinkel J, Eichinger M, Koenigkam-Santos M, Biederer J, Kauczor HU, Puderbach MU, Jobst BJ. Computer-aided detection of artificial pulmonary nodules using an ex vivo lung phantom: Influence of exposure parameters and iterative reconstruction. Eur J Radiol 2015; 84:1005-11. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.01.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2014] [Revised: 01/28/2015] [Accepted: 01/31/2015] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
21
|
Kim H, Park CM, Song YS, Lee SM, Goo JM. Influence of radiation dose and iterative reconstruction algorithms for measurement accuracy and reproducibility of pulmonary nodule volumetry: A phantom study. Eur J Radiol 2014; 83:848-57. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.01.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2013] [Revised: 01/24/2014] [Accepted: 01/26/2014] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
22
|
Computer-assisted solid lung nodule 3D volumetry on CT: influence of scan mode and iterative reconstruction: a CT phantom study. Jpn J Radiol 2013; 31:677-84. [PMID: 23955317 DOI: 10.1007/s11604-013-0235-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2013] [Accepted: 07/31/2013] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of high-resolution scan mode and iterative reconstruction on lung nodule 3D volumetry. METHODS Solid nodules with various sizes (5, 8, 10 and 12 mm) were placed inside a chest phantom. CT images were obtained with various tube currents, scan modes (conventional mode, high-resolution mode) and iterative reconstructions [0, 50 and 100 % blending of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR) and filtered back projection]. The nodule volumes were calculated using semiautomatic software and compared with the assumed volume from the nodules. RESULTS The mean absolute and relative percentage error improved when using iterative reconstruction especially when using the conventional scan mode; however, this effect was not significant. Significant reduction in volume overestimation was observed when using high-resolution scan mode (P = 0.011). CONCLUSION The high-resolution mode significantly reduces the volume overestimation of 3D volumetry. Iterative reconstruction shows a reduction in volume overestimation and error margin especially with the conventional scan mode; however, this effect was not significant.
Collapse
|