Yangsean Choi1, Bo Mi Gil1, Myung Hee Chung1, Won Jong Yoo1, Na Young Jung1, Yong Hyun Kim2, Soon Seog Kwon2, Jeana Kim3. 1. Department of Radiology, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Bucheon, Korea. 2. Division of Allergy and Pulmonary, Department of Internal Medicine, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Bucheon, Korea. 3. Department of Hospital Pathology, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Bucheon, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine whether semi-automated region of interest (ROI) measurement of CT attenuations of solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) is an accurate approach in differentiating malignant from benign SPN. METHODS: Ninety cases of pathologically proven SPN were retrospectively reviewed. CT attenuations of SPN before and after contrast injection were measured using semi-automated ROI selection method. Attenuations within a range of -100 to 200 Hounsfield units (HU) as soft tissue density range were set. The ROI included the entire SPN regardless of its internal soft tissue contents after automatic elimination of airs, calcific, or bony densities. RESULTS: There were 42 (46.7%) malignant SPN and 48 (53.3%) benign SPN, which were grouped into A (18 tuberculoma, 13 fungus), B (5 focal organizing pneumonia, 5 abscess), and C (7 other benign tumors). The malignant SPN showed significantly higher mean attenuations of enhancement and net-enhancement than all benign SPN (P<0.001). Using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), the cut-off net-enhancement of 15 HU gave 83% sensitivity, 65% specificity and 73% accuracy for predicting malignancy. Malignant SPN (mean 67.9 HU) had significantly higher enhancement than group A (mean 52.6 HU, P<0.001, 95% CI: 8.73, 21.81) and group B (mean 57.0 HU, P=0.025, 95% CI: -1.43, 20.34) while group C showed no significant difference (mean 68.1 HU, P=0.97). Net enhancements were higher in group B (mean 18.8 HU) than in group A (mean 8.8 HU) (P<0.001, 95% CI: 11.8, 23.18). CONCLUSIONS: The semi-automated ROI measurement of SPN's attenuations on CT is an accurate approach in distinguishing indeterminate SPN.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine whether semi-automated region of interest (ROI) measurement of CT attenuations of solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) is an accurate approach in differentiating malignant from benign SPN. METHODS: Ninety cases of pathologically proven SPN were retrospectively reviewed. CT attenuations of SPN before and after contrast injection were measured using semi-automated ROI selection method. Attenuations within a range of -100 to 200 Hounsfield units (HU) as soft tissue density range were set. The ROI included the entire SPN regardless of its internal soft tissue contents after automatic elimination of airs, calcific, or bony densities. RESULTS: There were 42 (46.7%) malignant SPN and 48 (53.3%) benign SPN, which were grouped into A (18 tuberculoma, 13 fungus), B (5 focal organizing pneumonia, 5 abscess), and C (7 other benign tumors). The malignant SPN showed significantly higher mean attenuations of enhancement and net-enhancement than all benign SPN (P<0.001). Using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), the cut-off net-enhancement of 15 HU gave 83% sensitivity, 65% specificity and 73% accuracy for predicting malignancy. Malignant SPN (mean 67.9 HU) had significantly higher enhancement than group A (mean 52.6 HU, P<0.001, 95% CI: 8.73, 21.81) and group B (mean 57.0 HU, P=0.025, 95% CI: -1.43, 20.34) while group C showed no significant difference (mean 68.1 HU, P=0.97). Net enhancements were higher in group B (mean 18.8 HU) than in group A (mean 8.8 HU) (P<0.001, 95% CI: 11.8, 23.18). CONCLUSIONS: The semi-automated ROI measurement of SPN's attenuations on CT is an accurate approach in distinguishing indeterminate SPN.
Authors: Dong Ming Xu; Rob J van Klaveren; Geertruida H de Bock; Anne Leusveld; Yingru Zhao; Ying Wang; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Harry J de Koning; Ernst T Scholten; Johny Verschakelen; Mathias Prokop; Matthijs Oudkerk Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: S J Swensen; R W Viggiano; D E Midthun; N L Müller; A Sherrick; K Yamashita; D P Naidich; E F Patz; T E Hartman; J R Muhm; A L Weaver Journal: Radiology Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Amir Onn; Du Hwan Choe; Roy S Herbst; Arlene M Correa; Reginald F Munden; Mylene T Truong; Ara A Vaporciyan; Takeshi Isobe; Michael Z Gilcrease; Edith M Marom Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Yeon Joo Jeong; Kyung Soo Lee; Sun Young Jeong; Myung Jin Chung; Sung Shine Shim; Hojoong Kim; O Jung Kwon; Seonwoo Kim Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Juergen F Schaefer; Joachim Vollmar; Fritz Schick; Reinhard Vonthein; Marcus D Seemann; Herrmann Aebert; Rainer Dierkesmann; Godehard Friedel; Claus D Claussen Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-06-23 Impact factor: 11.105