PURPOSE: There is no consensus as how to calculate orbital soft tissue volume based on CT or MRI scans. The authors sought to validate their technique and to assess the intraobserver and interobserver variability of their calculations of bony orbital volume (OV), orbital fat volume (FV), and extraocular muscle volume (MV) on CT scans of humans. METHODS: The authors calculated these volumes with the use of a manual segmentation technique on CT scans with commercially available software. Two observers (one of them masked) calculated the orbital soft tissue volumes in a CT scan of a phantom constructed of dry skull, butter, and chicken muscle. These calculations were compared with previously taken standard volume measurements of these materials. Repetitive calculations on one CT scan by the same observer were compared. Soft tissue volumes taken from 10 orbital CT scans were calculated by two observers and compared. From the data acquired, intraobserver and interobserver variability was calculated. RESULTS: Outcomes of these calculations using this software approximated the volumes of the phantom measured with standardized techniques. Accuracy of the phantom calculations between the two observers varied from +0.7% to -0.7% for FV and between -1.5% and -2.2% for MV. Mean differences between the repeated calculations were smaller than 5%. The intraclass correlation coefficient varied from 0.961 to 0.999. CONCLUSIONS: Calculating orbital soft tissue volume using a manual segmentation technique for CT scans is a reliable and accurate tool.
PURPOSE: There is no consensus as how to calculate orbital soft tissue volume based on CT or MRI scans. The authors sought to validate their technique and to assess the intraobserver and interobserver variability of their calculations of bony orbital volume (OV), orbital fat volume (FV), and extraocular muscle volume (MV) on CT scans of humans. METHODS: The authors calculated these volumes with the use of a manual segmentation technique on CT scans with commercially available software. Two observers (one of them masked) calculated the orbital soft tissue volumes in a CT scan of a phantom constructed of dry skull, butter, and chicken muscle. These calculations were compared with previously taken standard volume measurements of these materials. Repetitive calculations on one CT scan by the same observer were compared. Soft tissue volumes taken from 10 orbital CT scans were calculated by two observers and compared. From the data acquired, intraobserver and interobserver variability was calculated. RESULTS: Outcomes of these calculations using this software approximated the volumes of the phantom measured with standardized techniques. Accuracy of the phantom calculations between the two observers varied from +0.7% to -0.7% for FV and between -1.5% and -2.2% for MV. Mean differences between the repeated calculations were smaller than 5%. The intraclass correlation coefficient varied from 0.961 to 0.999. CONCLUSIONS: Calculating orbital soft tissue volume using a manual segmentation technique for CT scans is a reliable and accurate tool.
Authors: Maximilian E H Wagner; Nils-Claudius Gellrich; Karl-Ingo Friese; Matthias Becker; Franz-Erich Wolter; Juergen T Lichtenstein; Marcus Stoetzer; Majeed Rana; Harald Essig Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Qiu-Yue Cai; Zhi-Yi Chen; Wei Jiang; Yao-Sheng Luo; Zhang-Fang Li; Shi-di Hu; Jie Shen Journal: Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao Date: 2017-09-20
Authors: Christine Steiert; Sebastian Kuechlin; Waseem Masalha; Juergen Beck; Wolf Alexander Lagrèze; Juergen Grauvogel Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-06-06