OBJECTIVE: We wanted to compare the variability in the longitudinal emphysema index (EI) measurements that were computed with standard and high resolution (HR) reconstruction algorithms (RAs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 475 patients who underwent CT for surveillance of lung nodules. From this cohort, 50 patients (28 male) were included in the study. For these patients, the baseline and follow-up scans were acquired on the same multidetector CT scanner and using the same acquisition protocol. The CT scans were reconstructed with HR and standard RAs. We determined the difference in the EI between CT1 and CT2 for the HR and standard RAs, and we compared the variance of these differences. RESULTS: The mean of the variation of the total lung volume was 0.14 L (standard deviation [SD] = 0.13 L) for the standard RA and 0.16 L (SD = 0.15 L) for the HR RA. These differences were not significant. For the standard RA, the mean variation was 0.13% (SD = 0.44%) for EI -970 and 0.4% (SD = 0.88%) for EI -950; for the HR RA, the mean variation was 1.9% (SD = 2.2%) for EI -970 and 3.6% (SD = 3.7%) for EI -950. These differences were significant. CONCLUSION: Using an HR RA appears to increase the variability of the CT measurements of the EI.
OBJECTIVE: We wanted to compare the variability in the longitudinal emphysema index (EI) measurements that were computed with standard and high resolution (HR) reconstruction algorithms (RAs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 475 patients who underwent CT for surveillance of lung nodules. From this cohort, 50 patients (28 male) were included in the study. For these patients, the baseline and follow-up scans were acquired on the same multidetector CT scanner and using the same acquisition protocol. The CT scans were reconstructed with HR and standard RAs. We determined the difference in the EI between CT1 and CT2 for the HR and standard RAs, and we compared the variance of these differences. RESULTS: The mean of the variation of the total lung volume was 0.14 L (standard deviation [SD] = 0.13 L) for the standard RA and 0.16 L (SD = 0.15 L) for the HR RA. These differences were not significant. For the standard RA, the mean variation was 0.13% (SD = 0.44%) for EI -970 and 0.4% (SD = 0.88%) for EI -950; for the HR RA, the mean variation was 1.9% (SD = 2.2%) for EI -970 and 3.6% (SD = 3.7%) for EI -950. These differences were significant. CONCLUSION: Using an HR RA appears to increase the variability of the CT measurements of the EI.
Authors: S B Shaker; A Dirksen; L C Laursen; N Maltbaek; L Christensen; U Sander; N Seersholm; L T Skovgaard; L Nielsen; A Kok-Jensen Journal: Acta Radiol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 1.990
Authors: Kirsten L Boedeker; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Sarah R Rogers; Dao A Truong; Matthew S Brown; David W Gjertson; Jonathan G Goldin Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: P A Gevenois; P De Vuyst; V de Maertelaer; J Zanen; D Jacobovitz; M G Cosio; J C Yernault Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Seth T Bartel; Andrew J Bierhals; Thomas K Pilgram; Cheng Hong; Kenneth B Schechtman; Susan H Conradi; David S Gierada Journal: Med Phys Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Jennifer L Boes; Maria Bule; Benjamin A Hoff; Ryan Chamberlain; David A Lynch; Jadranka Stojanovska; Fernando J Martinez; Meilan K Han; Ella A Kazerooni; Brian D Ross; Craig J Galbán Journal: Tomography Date: 2015-09