Literature DB >> 19104439

Semi-automated quantification of hepatic lesions in a phantom.

Sebastian Keil1, Cedric Plumhans, Florian F Behrendt, Sven Stanzel, Michael Suehling, Georg Mühlenbruch, Andreas H Mahnken, Rolf W Günther, Marco Das.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Accurate measurement is crucial for the assessment of tumor dimensions to allow accurate evaluation of tumor response. Thus, the purpose of our study was to assess the accuracy of semi-automated RECIST and volumetric measurements of liver lesions in a liver phantom with different CT acquisition parameters.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A phantom of the upper abdomen with 14 hepatic lesions of different sizes (diameter: 12.0-40.0 mm), densities (45/180 HU at 120 kV), or alignment (vertical/transverse) was scanned with a 16-slice multidetector row computed tomography using varying tube currents (40/60/80/100/120/165mAs eff), reconstruction kernels (Siemens B20/30/40/50/70s), or slice thicknesses (1/2/3/4/5 mm). Longest axial diameter and volume of the 14 lesions were quantified using a semi-automated software tool (SyngoOncology, Siemens Medical Solutions, Forchheim, Germany) and compared with the known real longest axial diameter and volume values of the lesions. Absolute percentage errors (APE) were calculated. Degree of agreement in longest axial diameter and volume between software and real measurements was represented graphically in Bland-Altman plots and by corresponding concordance correlation coefficient.
RESULTS: At standard soft tissue reconstruction kernel (Siemens B30s) and slice thickness (3 mm) mean absolute percentage error APE (concordance correlation coefficients) ranged between 6.93 and 14.27 (0.96 and 0.99) for longest axial diameter and between 4.98 and 10.85 (0.99 and 1.00) for volume. At varying reconstruction kernels, APE values (concordance correlation coefficients) ranged between 7.92 and 8.31 (0.98 and 0.99) for longest axial diameter and between 4.95 and 6.93 (1.00) for volume. Applying different slice sections APE values (concordance correlation coefficients) differed from 6.54 to 11.82 (0.97 and 0.99) for longest axial diameter and from 6.93 to 9.17 (1.00) for volume.
CONCLUSIONS: Software quantification of longest axial diameter and volume of hepatic lesions in a phantom demonstrated a high correlation and accuracy under varying multidetector row computed tomography parameter.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19104439     DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181911ffa

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  7 in total

1.  Inter-Method Performance Study of Tumor Volumetry Assessment on Computed Tomography Test-Retest Data.

Authors:  Andrew J Buckler; Jovanna Danagoulian; Kjell Johnson; Adele Peskin; Marios A Gavrielides; Nicholas Petrick; Nancy A Obuchowski; Hubert Beaumont; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Rudresh Jarecha; Jan-Martin Kuhnigk; Ninad Mantri; Michael McNitt-Gray; Jan H Moltz; Gergely Nyiri; Sam Peterson; Pierre Tervé; Christian Tietjen; Etienne von Lavante; Xiaonan Ma; Samantha St Pierre; Maria Athelogou
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 3.173

2.  Towards volumetric thresholds in RECIST 1.1: Therapeutic response assessment in hepatic metastases.

Authors:  Katharina S Winter; Felix O Hofmann; Kolja M Thierfelder; Julian W Holch; Nina Hesse; Alena B Baumann; Dominik P Modest; Sebastian Stintzing; Volker Heinemann; Jens Ricke; Wieland H Sommer; Melvin D'Anastasi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Quantitative and volumetric European Association for the Study of the Liver and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors measurements: feasibility of a semiautomated software method to assess tumor response after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization.

Authors:  MingDe Lin; Olivier Pellerin; Nikhil Bhagat; Pramod P Rao; Romaric Loffroy; Roberto Ardon; Benoit Mory; Diane K Reyes; Jean-François Geschwind
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.464

4.  Intra- and inter-observer variability in measurement of target lesions: implication on response evaluation according to RECIST 1.1.

Authors:  Daniela Muenzel; Heinz-Peter Engels; Melanie Bruegel; Victoria Kehl; Ernst J Rummeny; Stephan Metz
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2012-01-02       Impact factor: 2.991

5.  Preclinical multimodality phantom design for quality assurance of tumor size measurement.

Authors:  Yongsook C Lee; Gary D Fullerton; Cristel Baiu; Margaret G Lescrenier; Beth A Goins
Journal:  BMC Med Phys       Date:  2011-09-30

6.  Tumor volume as an alternative response measurement for imatinib treated GIST patients.

Authors:  Gaia Schiavon; Alessandro Ruggiero; Patrick Schöffski; Bronno van der Holt; Dave J Bekers; Karel Eechoute; Vincent Vandecaveye; Gabriel P Krestin; Jaap Verweij; Stefan Sleijfer; Ron H J Mathijssen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-02       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Morphological and functional MDCT: problem-solving tool and surrogate biomarker for hepatic disease clinical care and drug discovery in the era of personalized medicine.

Authors:  Liang Wang
Journal:  Hepat Med       Date:  2010-08-17
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.