Enid M Eslick1, Dale L Bailey2, Benjamin Harris3, John Kipritidis1, Mark Stevens4, Bob T Li4, Elizabeth Bailey5, Denis Gradinscak5, Sean Pollock1, Chris Htun6, Robin Turner7, Thomas Eade8, Ali Aslani5, Graeme Snowdon5, Paul J Keall9. 1. Radiation Physics Laboratory, Sydney Medical School - Central, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 2. Sydney Medical School - Northern, University of Sydney, St Leonards, NSW, Australia Department of Nuclear Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. 3. Sydney Medical School - Northern, University of Sydney, St Leonards, NSW, Australia Department of Sleep and Respiratory Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. 4. Sydney Medical School - Northern, University of Sydney, St Leonards, NSW, Australia Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. 5. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. 6. Department of Sleep and Respiratory Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. 7. School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia. 8. Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. 9. Radiation Physics Laboratory, Sydney Medical School - Central, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia paul.keall@sydney.edu.au.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In lung cancer preoperative evaluation, functional lung imaging is commonly used to assess lobar function. Computed tomography ventilation (CT-V) imaging is an emerging lung function imaging modality. We compared CT-V imaging assessment of lobar function and its prediction of postoperative lung function to that achieved by (i) positron emission tomography ventilation (PET-V) imaging and (ii) the standard anatomical segment counting (ASC) method. We hypothesized (i) that CT-V and PET-V have similar relative lobar function and (ii) that functional imaging and anatomic assessment (ASC) yield different predicted postoperative (ppo) lung function and therefore could change clinical management. METHODS: In this proof-of-concept study, 11 patients were subjected to pulmonary function tests, CT-V and PET-V imaging. The Bland-Altman plot, Pearson's correlation and linear regression analysis were used to assess the agreement between the CT-V-, PET-V- and ASC-based quantification of lobar function and in the ppo lung function. RESULTS: CT-V and PET-V imaging demonstrated strong correlations in quantifying relative lobar function (r = 0.96; P < 0.001). A Wilcoxon-signed rank test showed no significant difference in the lobar function estimates between the two imaging modalities (P = 0.83). The Bland-Altman plot also showed no significant differences. The correlation between ASC-based lobar function estimates with ventilation imaging was low, r < 0.45; however, the predictions of postoperative lung function correlated strongly between all three methods. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of lobar function from CT-V imaging correlated strongly with PET-V imaging, but had low correlations with ASC. CT-V imaging may be a useful alternative method in preoperative evaluation for lung cancer patients.
OBJECTIVES: In lung cancer preoperative evaluation, functional lung imaging is commonly used to assess lobar function. Computed tomography ventilation (CT-V) imaging is an emerging lung function imaging modality. We compared CT-V imaging assessment of lobar function and its prediction of postoperative lung function to that achieved by (i) positron emission tomography ventilation (PET-V) imaging and (ii) the standard anatomical segment counting (ASC) method. We hypothesized (i) that CT-V and PET-V have similar relative lobar function and (ii) that functional imaging and anatomic assessment (ASC) yield different predicted postoperative (ppo) lung function and therefore could change clinical management. METHODS: In this proof-of-concept study, 11 patients were subjected to pulmonary function tests, CT-V and PET-V imaging. The Bland-Altman plot, Pearson's correlation and linear regression analysis were used to assess the agreement between the CT-V-, PET-V- and ASC-based quantification of lobar function and in the ppo lung function. RESULTS: CT-V and PET-V imaging demonstrated strong correlations in quantifying relative lobar function (r = 0.96; P < 0.001). A Wilcoxon-signed rank test showed no significant difference in the lobar function estimates between the two imaging modalities (P = 0.83). The Bland-Altman plot also showed no significant differences. The correlation between ASC-based lobar function estimates with ventilation imaging was low, r < 0.45; however, the predictions of postoperative lung function correlated strongly between all three methods. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of lobar function from CT-V imaging correlated strongly with PET-V imaging, but had low correlations with ASC. CT-V imaging may be a useful alternative method in preoperative evaluation for lung cancerpatients.
Authors: John Kipritidis; Bilal A Tahir; Guillaume Cazoulat; Michael S Hofman; Shankar Siva; Jason Callahan; Nicholas Hardcastle; Tokihiro Yamamoto; Gary E Christensen; Joseph M Reinhardt; Noriyuki Kadoya; Taylor J Patton; Sarah E Gerard; Isabella Duarte; Ben Archibald-Heeren; Mikel Byrne; Rick Sims; Scott Ramsay; Jeremy T Booth; Enid Eslick; Fiona Hegi-Johnson; Henry C Woodruff; Rob H Ireland; Jim M Wild; Jing Cai; John E Bayouth; Kristy Brock; Paul J Keall Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.071