Literature DB >> 16554568

Inherent variability of CT lung nodule measurements in vivo using semiautomated volumetric measurements.

Lawrence R Goodman1, Meltem Gulsun, Lacey Washington, Paul G Nagy, Kelly L Piacsek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate repeatability and reproducibility of lung nodule volume measurements using volumetric nodule-sizing software.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty nodules, less than 20 mm in diameter, in 29 patients were scanned with 1.25-mm collimation using MDCT (time 1 = T1). During the same session, two additional scans, using identical technique, were obtained through each nodule (T2, T3). Three observers working independently then obtained volumetric measurements using a semiautomated volumetric nodule-sizing software package. Qualitative nodule characterization was also performed. The Bland-Altman method for assessing measurement agreement was used to calculate the 95% limits for agreement for nodule volumes at T1, T2, and T3.
RESULTS: Automated nodule segmentation was successful in 438 (97%) of 450 measurements. Forty-three nodules were available for final evaluation. Twenty-six nodules had well-defined edges, and 17 had irregular or spiculated margins. Seventeen were freestanding, 16 were juxtapleural, and 10 were juxtavascular in location. Average nodule volume was 345.5 mm(3) (range, 49.3-1,434 mm(3)). The mean interobserver variability (repeatability) was 0.018% (SD = 0.73%), and the SD of the mean for the three contemporaneous scans (reproducibility) was 13.1% (confidence limits, +/- 25.6%). SD and confidence limits narrowed as volumes increased.
CONCLUSION: Volumetric measurements show minimal interobserver variability (0.018%) but an interscan SEM of 13.1% (confidence limits, +/- 25.6%). Repeatability and reproducibility of volumetric measurements are better than those of linear measurements reported in the literature.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16554568     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.04.1821

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  53 in total

Review 1.  Management of an incidentally discovered pulmonary nodule.

Authors:  Catherine Beigelman-Aubry; Catherine Hill; Philippe A Grenier
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-10-05       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) data collection process for nodule detection and annotation.

Authors:  Michael F McNitt-Gray; Samuel G Armato; Charles R Meyer; Anthony P Reeves; Geoffrey McLennan; Richie C Pais; John Freymann; Matthew S Brown; Roger M Engelmann; Peyton H Bland; Gary E Laderach; Chris Piker; Junfeng Guo; Zaid Towfic; David P-Y Qing; David F Yankelevitz; Denise R Aberle; Edwin J R van Beek; Heber MacMahon; Ella A Kazerooni; Barbara Y Croft; Laurence P Clarke
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  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

4.  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

Review 5.  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

6.  A comparison of six software packages for evaluation of solid lung nodules using semi-automated volumetry: what is the minimum increase in size to detect growth in repeated CT examinations.

Authors:  Bartjan de Hoop; Hester Gietema; Bram van Ginneken; Pieter Zanen; Gerard Groenewegen; Mathias Prokop
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-11-19       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Computer input devices: neutral party or source of significant error in manual lesion segmentation?

Authors:  James Y Chen; F Jacob Seagull; Paul Nagy; Paras Lakhani; Elias R Melhem; Eliot L Siegel; Nabile M Safdar
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  A comparison of ground truth estimation methods.

Authors:  Alberto M Biancardi; Artit C Jirapatnakul; Anthony P Reeves
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2009-12-09       Impact factor: 2.924

9.  Three-dimensional analysis of pulmonary nodules: variability of semiautomated volume measurements between different versions of the same software.

Authors:  M F Rinaldi; T Bartalena; L Braccaioli; N Sverzellati; S Mattioli; E Rimondi; G Rossi; M Zompatori; G Battista; R Canini
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 3.469

10.  Variability of semiautomated lung nodule volumetry on ultralow-dose CT: comparison with nodule volumetry on standard-dose CT.

Authors:  Patrick A Hein; Valentina C Romano; Patrik Rogalla; Christian Klessen; Alexander Lembcke; Lars Bornemann; Volker Dicken; Bernd Hamm; Hans-Christian Bauknecht
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-09-05       Impact factor: 4.056

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.