PURPOSE: This study was done to assess the diagnostic potential of dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) in the functional evaluation of lung cancer patients undergoing surgical resection. The CT data were compared with pulmonary perfusion scintigraphy and pulmonary function tests (PFTs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients were evaluated with DSCT, scintigraphy and PFTs. The DSCT scan protocol was as follows: two tubes (80 and 140 kV; Care Dose protocol); 70 cc of contrast material (5 cc/s); 5- to 6-s scan time; 0.6 mm collimation. After the automatic calculation of lung perfusion with DSCT and quantification of air volumes and emphysema with dedicated software applications, the perfusional CT studies were compared with scintigraphy using a visual score for perfusion defects; CT air volumes and emphysema were compared with PFTs. RESULTS: The values of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of DSCT compared with perfusion scintigraphy as the reference standard were: 0.88, 0.84, 0.90, 0.93 and 0.88, respectively. The McNemar test did not identify significant differences either between the two imaging techniques (p=0.07) or between CT and PFTs (p=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: DSCT is a robust and promising technique that provides important and accurate information on lung function.
PURPOSE: This study was done to assess the diagnostic potential of dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) in the functional evaluation of lung cancerpatients undergoing surgical resection. The CT data were compared with pulmonary perfusion scintigraphy and pulmonary function tests (PFTs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients were evaluated with DSCT, scintigraphy and PFTs. The DSCT scan protocol was as follows: two tubes (80 and 140 kV; Care Dose protocol); 70 cc of contrast material (5 cc/s); 5- to 6-s scan time; 0.6 mm collimation. After the automatic calculation of lung perfusion with DSCT and quantification of air volumes and emphysema with dedicated software applications, the perfusional CT studies were compared with scintigraphy using a visual score for perfusion defects; CT air volumes and emphysema were compared with PFTs. RESULTS: The values of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of DSCT compared with perfusion scintigraphy as the reference standard were: 0.88, 0.84, 0.90, 0.93 and 0.88, respectively. The McNemar test did not identify significant differences either between the two imaging techniques (p=0.07) or between CT and PFTs (p=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: DSCT is a robust and promising technique that provides important and accurate information on lung function.
Authors: Jiří Ferda; Eva Ferdová; Hynek Mírka; Jan Baxa; Alena Bednářová; Thomas Flohr; Bernhard Schmidt; Martin Matějovič; Boris Kreuzberg Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2009-08-29 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: F Fraioli; F A Calabrese; F Venuta; M Anile; L Bertoletti; I Carbone; C Catalano; R Passariello Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2006-08-11 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Joachim Ernst Wildberger; Ernst Klotz; Hendrik Ditt; Elmar Spüntrup; Andreas H Mahnken; Rolf W Günther Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-03-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Martin Petersilka; Herbert Bruder; Bernhard Krauss; Karl Stierstorfer; Thomas G Flohr Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2008-10-07 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Sven F Thieme; Christoph R Becker; Marcus Hacker; Konstantin Nikolaou; Maximilian F Reiser; Thorsten R C Johnson Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2008-09-05 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Marco Sperandeo; Antonio Rotondo; Giuseppe Guglielmi; Daniela Catalano; Beatrice Feragalli; Guglielmo M Trovato Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2014-02-05 Impact factor: 3.469