K W Doo1, E-Y Kang, H S Yong, O H Woo, K Y Lee, Y-W Oh. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Korea University Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess accuracy of lung nodule volumetry in low-dose CT with application of iterative reconstruction (IR) according to nodule size, nodule density and CT tube currents, using artificial lung nodules within an anthropomorphic thoracic phantom. METHODS: Eight artificial nodules (four diameters: 5, 8, 10 and 12 mm; two CT densities: -630 HU that represents ground-glass nodule and +100 HU that represents solid nodule) were randomly placed inside a thoracic phantom. Scans were performed with tube current-time product to 10, 20, 30 and 50 mAs. Images were reconstructed with IR and filtered back projection (FBP). We compared volume estimates to a reference standard and calculated the absolute percentage error (APE). RESULTS: The APE of all nodules was significantly lower when IR was used than with FBP (7.5 ± 4.7% compared with 9.0 ±6.9%; p < 0.001). The effect of IR was more pronounced for smaller nodules (p < 0.001). IR showed a significantly lower APE than FBP in ground-glass nodules (p < 0.0001), and the difference was more pronounced at the lowest tube current (11.8 ± 5.9% compared with 21.3 ± 6.1%; p < 0.0001). The effect of IR was most pronounced for ground-glass nodules in the lowest CT tube current. CONCLUSION: Lung nodule volumetry in low-dose CT by application of IR showed reliable accuracy in a phantom study. Lung nodule volumetry can be reliably applicable to all lung nodules including small, ground-glass nodules even in ultra-low-dose CT with application of IR. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: IR significantly improved the accuracy of lung nodule volumetry compared with FBP particularly for ground-glass (-630 HU) nodules. Volumetry in low-dose CT can be utilized in patient with lung nodule work-up, and IR has benefit for small, ground-glass lung nodules in low-dose CT.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess accuracy of lung nodule volumetry in low-dose CT with application of iterative reconstruction (IR) according to nodule size, nodule density and CT tube currents, using artificial lung nodules within an anthropomorphic thoracic phantom. METHODS: Eight artificial nodules (four diameters: 5, 8, 10 and 12 mm; two CT densities: -630 HU that represents ground-glass nodule and +100 HU that represents solid nodule) were randomly placed inside a thoracic phantom. Scans were performed with tube current-time product to 10, 20, 30 and 50 mAs. Images were reconstructed with IR and filtered back projection (FBP). We compared volume estimates to a reference standard and calculated the absolute percentage error (APE). RESULTS: The APE of all nodules was significantly lower when IR was used than with FBP (7.5 ± 4.7% compared with 9.0 ±6.9%; p < 0.001). The effect of IR was more pronounced for smaller nodules (p < 0.001). IR showed a significantly lower APE than FBP in ground-glass nodules (p < 0.0001), and the difference was more pronounced at the lowest tube current (11.8 ± 5.9% compared with 21.3 ± 6.1%; p < 0.0001). The effect of IR was most pronounced for ground-glass nodules in the lowest CT tube current. CONCLUSION: Lung nodule volumetry in low-dose CT by application of IR showed reliable accuracy in a phantom study. Lung nodule volumetry can be reliably applicable to all lung nodules including small, ground-glass nodules even in ultra-low-dose CT with application of IR. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: IR significantly improved the accuracy of lung nodule volumetry compared with FBP particularly for ground-glass (-630 HU) nodules. Volumetry in low-dose CT can be utilized in patient with lung nodule work-up, and IR has benefit for small, ground-glass lung nodules in low-dose CT.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jane P Ko; Henry Rusinek; Erika L Jacobs; James S Babb; Margrit Betke; Georgeann McGuinness; David P Naidich Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jin Mo Goo; Trongtum Tongdee; Ranista Tongdee; Kwangjae Yeo; Charles F Hildebolt; Kyongtae T Bae Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Marco Das; Julia Ley-Zaporozhan; H A Gietema; Andre Czech; Georg Mühlenbruch; Andreas H Mahnken; Markus Katoh; Annemarie Bakai; Marcos Salganicoff; Stefan Diederich; Mathias Prokop; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Rolf W Günther; Joachim E Wildberger Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-01-06 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Rob J van Klaveren; Matthijs Oudkerk; Mathias Prokop; Ernst T Scholten; Kristiaan Nackaerts; Rene Vernhout; Carola A van Iersel; Karien A M van den Bergh; Susan van 't Westeinde; Carlijn van der Aalst; Erik Thunnissen; Dong Ming Xu; Ying Wang; Yingru Zhao; Hester A Gietema; Bart-Jan de Hoop; Harry J M Groen; Geertruida H de Bock; Peter van Ooijen; Carla Weenink; Johny Verschakelen; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Wim Timens; Dik Willebrand; Aryan Vink; Willem Mali; Harry J de Koning Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-12-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Cristiano Rampinelli; Daniela Origgi; Vittoria Vecchi; Luigi Funicelli; Sara Raimondi; Paul Deak; Massimo Bellomi Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2015-02-06 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Stefano Young; Hyun J Grace Kim; Moe Moe Ko; War War Ko; Carlos Flores; Michael F McNitt-Gray Journal: Med Phys Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Matthias Eberhard; Daniel Stocker; Gianluca Milanese; Katharina Martini; Thi Dan Linh Nguyen-Kim; Moritz C Wurnig; Thomas Frauenfelder; Stephan Baumueller Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Marios A Gavrielides; Benjamin P Berman; Mark Supanich; Kurt Schultz; Qin Li; Nicholas Petrick; Rongping Zeng; Jenifer Siegelman Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2017-12