Literature DB >> 16087090

Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the assessment of pulmonary nodule size on CT using film and computer display methods.

Naama R Bogot1, Ella A Kazerooni, Aine M Kelly, Leslie E Quint, Benoit Desjardins, Bin Nan.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: A critical element in determining biologic behavior of pulmonary nodules is volume and temporal volume change. We evaluate variability in nodule volume among readers and measuring methods.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 55 small (<2 cm) lung nodules were measured in long- and short-axis dimensions independently by 4 radiologists, using 3 methods: 1) hard copy, 2) GE Advantage Windows workstation (GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, WI), 3) Siemens IMACS workstation (Siemens Medical Systems, Iselan, NJ). Nodule margin was recorded as smooth, lobulated, or spiculated. Volume was calculated from diameter measurements. Variability in nodule volume was evaluated within each reader, between readers, and across measurement tools.
RESULTS: Mean nodule short-axis diameter was 5.3 mm; mean long-axis diameter 7.2 mm. There was statistically significant variation among readers and measurement method for nodule volume. Volume was significantly larger using hard-copy measurements (51.9%-54.1% variation; P < .0001) than either workstation, and not different between workstations. There was greater intraobserver variability in volume using the hard-copy method, and no difference between workstation methods. Volumes based on measurements from one reader were consistently lower than those from other readers (P = < .001, .003, and .02); volume was consistently larger for another reader (P < .0001, .03, and .12). Reader agreement for nodule margin was good to excellent.
CONCLUSION: Considerable interobserver and intraobserver variability in measuring nodules exists using hard-copy and computer tools. Since a small change in diameter indicates a much larger change in volume, this may be significant when using early repeat CT to follow small pulmonary nodules. Computer-aided diagnostic tools that reproducibly measure nodule volume are strongly needed.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16087090     DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2005.04.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  22 in total

Review 1.  The use of tumour volumetrics to assess response to therapy in anticancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Gregory V Goldmacher; James Conklin
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Accuracy of automated volumetry of pulmonary nodules across different multislice CT scanners.

Authors:  Marco Das; Julia Ley-Zaporozhan; H A Gietema; Andre Czech; Georg Mühlenbruch; Andreas H Mahnken; Markus Katoh; Annemarie Bakai; Marcos Salganicoff; Stefan Diederich; Mathias Prokop; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Rolf W Günther; Joachim E Wildberger
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-01-06       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Evaluation of lung MDCT nodule annotation across radiologists and methods.

Authors:  Charles R Meyer; Timothy D Johnson; Geoffrey McLennan; Denise R Aberle; Ella A Kazerooni; Heber Macmahon; Brian F Mullan; David F Yankelevitz; Edwin J R van Beek; Samuel G Armato; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Anthony P Reeves; David Gur; Claudia I Henschke; Eric A Hoffman; Peyton H Bland; Gary Laderach; Richie Pais; David Qing; Chris Piker; Junfeng Guo; Adam Starkey; Daniel Max; Barbara Y Croft; Laurence P Clarke
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC): a comparison of different size metrics for pulmonary nodule measurements.

Authors:  Anthony P Reeves; Alberto M Biancardi; Tatiyana V Apanasovich; Charles R Meyer; Heber MacMahon; Edwin J R van Beek; Ella A Kazerooni; David Yankelevitz; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Geoffrey McLennan; Samuel G Armato; Claudia I Henschke; Denise R Aberle; Barbara Y Croft; Laurence P Clarke
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  The effect of lung volume on nodule size on CT.

Authors:  Iva Petkovska; Matthew S Brown; Jonathan G Goldin; Hyun J Kim; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Fereidoun G Abtin; Raffi J Ghurabi; Denise R Aberle
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.173

6.  Effect of CT scanning parameters on volumetric measurements of pulmonary nodules by 3D active contour segmentation: a phantom study.

Authors:  Ted W Way; Heang-Ping Chan; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Berkman Sahiner; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Chuan Zhou; Aamer Chughtai
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-02-13       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 7.  Noncalcified lung nodules: volumetric assessment with thoracic CT.

Authors:  Marios A Gavrielides; Lisa M Kinnard; Kyle J Myers; Nicholas Petrick
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 8.  Cardiac computed tomographic angiography: evaluation of non-cardiac structures.

Authors:  Samuel Wann; Peter Rao; Roger Des Prez
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 5.952

9.  Evaluation of reader variability in the interpretation of follow-up CT scans at lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Satinder Singh; Paul Pinsky; Naomi S Fineberg; David S Gierada; Kavita Garg; Yanhui Sun; P Hrudaya Nath
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-01-19       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Quantitative imaging to assess tumor response to therapy: common themes of measurement, truth data, and error sources.

Authors:  Charles R Meyer; Samuel G Armato; Charles P Fenimore; Geoffrey McLennan; Luc M Bidaut; Daniel P Barboriak; Marios A Gavrielides; Edward F Jackson; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Paul E Kinahan; Nicholas Petrick; Binsheng Zhao
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.243

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.