RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Lung and lobar volume measurements from computed tomographic (CT) imaging are being used in clinical trials to assess new minimally invasive emphysema treatments aiming to reduce lung volumes. Establishing the reproducibility of lung volume measurements is important if they are to be accepted as treatment planning and outcome variables. The aims of this study were to (1) investigate the correlation between lung volumes assessed on CT imaging and on pulmonary function testing (PFT), (2) compare the two methods' reproducibility, and (3) assess the reproducibility of CT lobar volumes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT imaging and body plethysmography were performed at baseline and after a 9-month interval in multicenter emphysema treatment trials. Lung volumes were measured at total lung capacity (TLC) and at residual volume (RV). Lobar volumes were measured on CT imaging using a semiautomated technique. The correlations between CT and PFT volumes were computed for 486 subjects at baseline. Reproducibility was assessed in terms of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for 126 subjects from the control group at TLC and 120 subjects at RV. RESULTS: Correlations between CT and PFT lung volumes were 0.86 at TLC and 0.67 at RV. At TLC, the ICCs were 0.943 for CT imaging and 0.814 for PFT. At RV, the ICCs were 0.886 for CT imaging and 0.683 for PFT. CT lobar volumes showed good reproducibility (all P values < .05). CONCLUSION: CT lung and lobar volume measurements could be captured in a multicenter trial setting with high reproducibility and were highly correlated with those obtained on PFT. CT imaging showed significantly better reproducibility than PFT between interval lung volume measurements, offering the potential for designing emphysema treatment trials involving fewer subjects.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Lung and lobar volume measurements from computed tomographic (CT) imaging are being used in clinical trials to assess new minimally invasive emphysema treatments aiming to reduce lung volumes. Establishing the reproducibility of lung volume measurements is important if they are to be accepted as treatment planning and outcome variables. The aims of this study were to (1) investigate the correlation between lung volumes assessed on CT imaging and on pulmonary function testing (PFT), (2) compare the two methods' reproducibility, and (3) assess the reproducibility of CT lobar volumes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT imaging and body plethysmography were performed at baseline and after a 9-month interval in multicenter emphysema treatment trials. Lung volumes were measured at total lung capacity (TLC) and at residual volume (RV). Lobar volumes were measured on CT imaging using a semiautomated technique. The correlations between CT and PFT volumes were computed for 486 subjects at baseline. Reproducibility was assessed in terms of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for 126 subjects from the control group at TLC and 120 subjects at RV. RESULTS: Correlations between CT and PFT lung volumes were 0.86 at TLC and 0.67 at RV. At TLC, the ICCs were 0.943 for CT imaging and 0.814 for PFT. At RV, the ICCs were 0.886 for CT imaging and 0.683 for PFT. CT lobar volumes showed good reproducibility (all P values < .05). CONCLUSION: CT lung and lobar volume measurements could be captured in a multicenter trial setting with high reproducibility and were highly correlated with those obtained on PFT. CT imaging showed significantly better reproducibility than PFT between interval lung volume measurements, offering the potential for designing emphysema treatment trials involving fewer subjects.
Authors: Daniel Chong; Matthew S Brown; Hyun J Kim; Eva M van Rikxoort; Laura Guzman; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Maryam Khatonabadi; Maya Galperin-Aizenberg; Heidi Coy; Katherine Yang; Yongha Jung; Jonathan G Goldin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Emily S Wan; John E Hokanson; James R Murphy; Elizabeth A Regan; Barry J Make; David A Lynch; James D Crapo; Edwin K Silverman Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2011-04-14 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Sanghun Choi; Eric A Hoffman; Sally E Wenzel; Merryn H Tawhai; Youbing Yin; Mario Castro; Ching-Long Lin Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2013-06-06
Authors: Jered P Sieren; John D Newell; R Graham Barr; Eugene R Bleecker; Nathan Burnette; Elizabeth E Carretta; David Couper; Jonathan Goldin; Junfeng Guo; MeiLan K Han; Nadia N Hansel; Richard E Kanner; Ella A Kazerooni; Fernando J Martinez; Stephen Rennard; Prescott G Woodruff; Eric A Hoffman Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-10-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Matthew S Brown; Hyun J Kim; Fereidoun G Abtin; Charlie Strange; Maya Galperin-Aizenberg; Richard Pais; Irene G Da Costa; Arash Ordookhani; Daniel Chong; Chiayi Ni; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Donald P Tashkin; Jonathan G Goldin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-04-01 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Stefan F Nemec; Francesco Molinari; Valerie Dufresne; Natacha Gosset; Mario Silva; Alexander A Bankier Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-01-11 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Rahul G Argula; Maria Kokosi; Pechin Lo; Hyun J Kim; James G Ravenel; Cristopher Meyer; Jonathan Goldin; Hye-Seung Lee; Charlie Strange; Francis X McCormack Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2016-03
Authors: Carolyn E Come; Alejandro A Diaz; Douglas Curran-Everett; Nivedita Muralidhar; Craig P Hersh; Jordan A Zach; Joyce Schroeder; David A Lynch; Bartolome Celli; George R Washko Journal: Chest Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Charles R Hatt; Andrea S Oh; Nancy A Obuchowski; Jean-Paul Charbonnier; David A Lynch; Stephen M Humphries Journal: Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging Date: 2021-04-22