Datong Su1, Lei Feng2, Yingjian Jiang1, Ying Wang1. 1. Department of Radiology, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, Tianjin 300052, China. 2. Department of Radiology, Tianjin Xiqing Hospital, Tianjin 300000, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The computed tomography (CT) follow-up of indeterminate pulmonary nodules aiming to evaluate the change of the volume and CT value is the common strategy in clinic. The CT dose needs to considered on serious CT scans in addition to the measurement accuracy. The purpose of this study is to quantify the precision of pulmonary nodule volumetric measurement and CT value measurement with various tube currents and reconstruction algorithms in a phantom study with dual-energy CT. METHODS: A chest phantom containing 9 artificial spherical solid nodules with known diameter (D=2.5 mm, 5 mm, 10 mm) and density (-100 HU, 60 HU and 100 HU) was scanned using a 64-row detector CT canner at 120 Kilovolt & various currents (10 mA, 20 mA, 50 mA, 80 mA,100 mA, 150 mA and 350 mA). Raw data were reconstructed with filtered back projection and three levels of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm (FBP, ASIR; 30%, 50% and 80%). Automatic volumetric measurements were performed using commercially available software. The relative volume error (RVE) and the absolute attenuation error (AAE) between the software measures and the reference-standard were calculated. Analyses of the variance were performed to evaluate the effect of reconstruction methods, different scan parameters, nodule size and attenuation on the RPE. RESULTS: The software substantially overestimated the very small (D=2.5 mm) nodule's volume [mean RVE: (100.8%±28%)] and underestimated it attenuation [mean AAE: (-756±80) HU]. The mean RVEs of nodule with diameter as 5 mm and 10 mm were small [(-0.9%±1.1%) vs (0.9%±1.4%)], however, the mean AAEs [(-243±26) HU vs (-129±7) HU)] were large. The ANOVA analysis for repeated measurements showed that different tube current and reconstruction algorithm had no significant effect on the volumetric measurements for nodules with diameter of 5 mm and 10 mm (F=5.60, P=0.10 vs F=11.13, P=0.08), but significant effects on the measurement of CT value (F=34.79, P<0.001 vs F=156.14, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An infinitesimally small errors of volumetric measurement of 5 mm or 10 mm nodule could achieved with very low current and ASIR reconstruction, suggesting a possibility of remarkable radiation dose reductions, while it is not applicable for 5 mm nodule. The attenuation acquired through three dimensional software has large measurement error and can not applied in clinical currently. .
BACKGROUND: The computed tomography (CT) follow-up of indeterminate pulmonary nodules aiming to evaluate the change of the volume and CT value is the common strategy in clinic. The CT dose needs to considered on serious CT scans in addition to the measurement accuracy. The purpose of this study is to quantify the precision of pulmonary nodule volumetric measurement and CT value measurement with various tube currents and reconstruction algorithms in a phantom study with dual-energy CT. METHODS: A chest phantom containing 9 artificial spherical solid nodules with known diameter (D=2.5 mm, 5 mm, 10 mm) and density (-100 HU, 60 HU and 100 HU) was scanned using a 64-row detector CT canner at 120 Kilovolt & various currents (10 mA, 20 mA, 50 mA, 80 mA,100 mA, 150 mA and 350 mA). Raw data were reconstructed with filtered back projection and three levels of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm (FBP, ASIR; 30%, 50% and 80%). Automatic volumetric measurements were performed using commercially available software. The relative volume error (RVE) and the absolute attenuation error (AAE) between the software measures and the reference-standard were calculated. Analyses of the variance were performed to evaluate the effect of reconstruction methods, different scan parameters, nodule size and attenuation on the RPE. RESULTS: The software substantially overestimated the very small (D=2.5 mm) nodule's volume [mean RVE: (100.8%±28%)] and underestimated it attenuation [mean AAE: (-756±80) HU]. The mean RVEs of nodule with diameter as 5 mm and 10 mm were small [(-0.9%±1.1%) vs (0.9%±1.4%)], however, the mean AAEs [(-243±26) HU vs (-129±7) HU)] were large. The ANOVA analysis for repeated measurements showed that different tube current and reconstruction algorithm had no significant effect on the volumetric measurements for nodules with diameter of 5 mm and 10 mm (F=5.60, P=0.10 vs F=11.13, P=0.08), but significant effects on the measurement of CT value (F=34.79, P<0.001 vs F=156.14, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An infinitesimally small errors of volumetric measurement of 5 mm or 10 mm nodule could achieved with very low current and ASIR reconstruction, suggesting a possibility of remarkable radiation dose reductions, while it is not applicable for 5 mm nodule. The attenuation acquired through three dimensional software has large measurement error and can not applied in clinical currently. .
根据9个结节在28套CT图像中所得的数据计算其容积RVE及CT值AAE(表 1)。直径为2.5 mm结节的容积测量相对误差(100.8%±28%)及CT值绝对误差(-756±80)HU均较大;直径为5 mm及10 mm结节的容积相对误差很小[(-0.9%±1.1%) vs (0.9%±1.4%)],CT值绝对误差很大[(-243±26) HU vs (-129±7) HU]。其中直径为2.5 mm体模结节的容积被明显高估,且测量CT值与标准CT值相差悬殊。直径为5 mm及10 mm结节的测量容积几乎与标准容积相等,误差值很小,但测量CT值与标准CT值仍存在很大误差。
1
结节的容积测量相对误差及CT值测量绝对误差
The relative error of volume and the absolute error of CT value of nodules
结节的容积测量相对误差及CT值测量绝对误差The relative error of volume and the absolute error of CT value of nodules将所得原始数据按照不同的管电流及重建算法进行分类处理(图 2-图 5),结果显示:对于直径为2.5 mm的结节在7种不同管电流及4种不同重建算法下,结节的容积相对误差及CT值绝对误差均较大。对于直径为5.0 mm及10.0 mm的结节,不同管电流及重建算法对结节的容积相对误差几乎没有影响;但CT值绝对误差较大。
2
不同管电流对结节容积相对误差
The RVE for different cube current
5
不同重建算法对结节CT值绝对误差
The AEE for different reconstruction algorithm
不同管电流对结节容积相对误差The RVE for different cube current不同管电流对结节CT值绝对误差The AAE for different cube current不同重建算法对结节容积相对误差The RVE for different reconstruction algorithm不同重建算法对结节CT值绝对误差The AEE for different reconstruction algorithm
结节容积测量相对误差及CT值测量绝对误差的影响因素
由于直径2.5 mm的结节在7种不同管电流及4种不同重建算法下,结节的容积相对误差及CT值绝对误差均较5 mm及10 mm结节明显增大,将其纳入重复测量方差分析意义不大,故仅对直径为5.0 mm及10.0 mm的结节做进一步方差分析,结果显示:不同管电流及原始数据重建算法对容积相对误差没有显著影响(F=5.6, P=0.10; F=11.13, P=0.08),对CT值绝对误差有显著影响(F=34.79, P < 0.001; F=156.14, P < 0.001)。
Authors: William J Kostis; David F Yankelevitz; Anthony P Reeves; Simina C Fluture; Claudia I Henschke Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: E Stephen Amis; Priscilla F Butler; Kimberly E Applegate; Steven B Birnbaum; Libby F Brateman; James M Hevezi; Fred A Mettler; Richard L Morin; Michael J Pentecost; Geoffrey G Smith; Keith J Strauss; Robert K Zeman Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Marjolein A Heuvelmans; Matthijs Oudkerk; Geertruida H de Bock; Harry J de Koning; Xueqian Xie; Peter M A van Ooijen; Marcel J W Greuter; Pim A de Jong; Harry J M Groen; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-03-19 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Douglas E Wood; Ella Kazerooni; Scott L Baum; Mark T Dransfield; George A Eapen; David S Ettinger; Lifang Hou; David M Jackman; Donald Klippenstein; Rohit Kumar; Rudy P Lackner; Lorriana E Leard; Ann N C Leung; Samir S Makani; Pierre P Massion; Bryan F Meyers; Gregory A Otterson; Kimberly Peairs; Sudhakar Pipavath; Christie Pratt-Pozo; Chakravarthy Reddy; Mary E Reid; Arnold J Rotter; Peter B Sachs; Matthew B Schabath; Lecia V Sequist; Betty C Tong; William D Travis; Stephen C Yang; Kristina M Gregory; Miranda Hughes Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 11.908