PURPOSE: To compare the reproducibility (r) of CT value measurement of pulmonary nodules using volumetry software (LungCare, LC) and manual ROIs (mROI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 54 artificial nodules in a chest phantom were scanned three times with CT. CT values were measured with LC and mROI. The intrascan-r was assessed with three measurements in the first scan, and the interscan-r with measurements in three consecutive scans (one observer). Intrascan-r und interobserver-r (two obs.) were assessed in the first scan and in contrast-enhanced CT of 51 nodules from 15 patients (kernels b50f and b80f). Intrascan-r and interscan-r were described as the mean range and interobserver-r as the mean difference of CT values. The significance of differences was tested using t-test and sign test. RESULTS: Reproducibility was significantly higher for volumetry-based measurements in both artificial and patient nodules (range 0.11 vs. 6.16 HU for intrascan-r, 2.22 vs. 7.03 HU for interscan-r, difference 0.11 vs. 18.42 HU for interobserver-r; patients: 1.78 vs. 13.19 HU (b50f-Kernel) and 1.88 vs. 27.4 HU (b80f-Kernel) for intrascan-r, 3.71 vs. 22.43 HU for interobserver-r). Absolute CT values differed significantly between convolution kernels (pat./mROI: 29.3 [b50f] and 151.9 HU [b80f] pat./LC: 5 [b50f] and 147 HU [b80f]). CONCLUSION: The reproducibility of volumetry-based measurements of CT values in pulmonary nodules is significantly higher and should therefore be recommended, e. g. in dynamic chest CT protocols. Reproducibility does not depend on absolute CT values.
PURPOSE: To compare the reproducibility (r) of CT value measurement of pulmonary nodules using volumetry software (LungCare, LC) and manual ROIs (mROI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 54 artificial nodules in a chest phantom were scanned three times with CT. CT values were measured with LC and mROI. The intrascan-r was assessed with three measurements in the first scan, and the interscan-r with measurements in three consecutive scans (one observer). Intrascan-r und interobserver-r (two obs.) were assessed in the first scan and in contrast-enhanced CT of 51 nodules from 15 patients (kernels b50f and b80f). Intrascan-r and interscan-r were described as the mean range and interobserver-r as the mean difference of CT values. The significance of differences was tested using t-test and sign test. RESULTS: Reproducibility was significantly higher for volumetry-based measurements in both artificial and patient nodules (range 0.11 vs. 6.16 HU for intrascan-r, 2.22 vs. 7.03 HU for interscan-r, difference 0.11 vs. 18.42 HU for interobserver-r; patients: 1.78 vs. 13.19 HU (b50f-Kernel) and 1.88 vs. 27.4 HU (b80f-Kernel) for intrascan-r, 3.71 vs. 22.43 HU for interobserver-r). Absolute CT values differed significantly between convolution kernels (pat./mROI: 29.3 [b50f] and 151.9 HU [b80f] pat./LC: 5 [b50f] and 147 HU [b80f]). CONCLUSION: The reproducibility of volumetry-based measurements of CT values in pulmonary nodules is significantly higher and should therefore be recommended, e. g. in dynamic chest CT protocols. Reproducibility does not depend on absolute CT values.