Journal of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회지)

The Korean Society of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회)
권호 표지

Three-Dimensional Volume Assessment Accuracy in Computed Tomography Using a Phantom

모형물을 이용한 전산화 단층 촬영에서 3차원적 부피측정의 정확성 평가

  • Kim, Hyun-Su (Research Institute of Life Sciences, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Wang, Ji-Hwan (Research Institute of Life Sciences, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Lim, Il-Hyuk (Research Institute of Life Sciences, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Park, Ki-Tae (Research Institute of Life Sciences, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Yeon, Seong-Chan (Research Institute of Life Sciences, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Lee, Hee-Chun (Research Institute of Life Sciences, Gyeongsang National University)
  • 김현수 (경상대학교 생명과학연구원) ;
  • 왕지환 (경상대학교 생명과학연구원) ;
  • 임일혁 (경상대학교 생명과학연구원) ;
  • 박기태 (경상대학교 생명과학연구원) ;
  • 연성찬 (경상대학교 생명과학연구원) ;
  • 이희천 (경상대학교 생명과학연구원)
  • Accepted : 2013.04.04
  • Published : 2013.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of reconstruction kernel, and slice thickness on the accuracy of spiral CT-based volume assessment over a range of object sizes typical of synthetic simulated tumor. Spiral CT scanning was performed at various reconstruction kernels (soft tissue, standard, bone), and slice thickness (1, 2, 3 mm) using a phantom made of gelatin and 10 synthetic simulated tumors of different sizes (diameter 3.0-12.0 mm). Three-dimensional volume assessments were obtained using an automated software tool. Results were compared with the reference volume by calculating the percentage error. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and setting statistical significance at P < 0.05. In general, smaller slice thickness and larger sphere diameters produced more accurate volume assessment than larger slice thickness and smaller sphere diameter. The measured volumes were larger than the actual volumes by a common factor depending on slice thickness; in 100HU simulated tumors that had statistically significant, 1 mm slice thickness produced on average 27.41%, 2 mm slice thickness produced 45.61%, 3 mm slice thickness produced 93.36% overestimates of volume. However, there was no statistically significant difference in volume error for spiral CT scans taken with techniques where only reconstruction kernel was changed. These results supported that synthetic simulated tumor size, slice thickness were significant parameters in determining volume measurement errors. For an accurate volumetric measurement of an object, it is critical to select an appropriate slice thickness and to consider the size of an object.

Keywords

References

  1. Fishman EK, Derbin B, Magid D, Scott WW Jr, Ney DR, Brooker AF Jr, Riley LH Jr, St Ville JA, Zerhouni EA, Siegelman SS. Volumetric rendering techniques: applications for three-dimensional imaging of the hip. Radiology 1987; 163: 737-738.
  2. Gietema HA, Schaefer-Prokop CM, Mali WP, Groenewegen G, Prokop M. Pulmonary nodules: interscan variability of semiautomated volume measurements with multisection CTinfluence of inspiration level, nodule size, and segmentation performance. Radiology 2007; 245: 888-894. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2452061054
  3. Goo JM, Tongdee T, Tongdee R, Yeo K, Hildebolt CF, Bae KT. Volumetric measurement of synthetic lung nodules with multi-detector row CT: effect of various image reconstruction parameters and segmentation thresholds on measurement accuracy. Radiology 2005; 235: 850-856. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2353040737
  4. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, Naidich DP, McGuinness G, Miettinen OS, Libby DM, Pasmantier MW, Koizumi J, Altorki NK, Smith JP. Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. The Lancet 1999; 354: 99-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)06093-6
  5. Kalender WA, Seissler W, Klotz E, Vock P. Spiral volumetric CT with single-breath-hold technique, continuous transport, and continuous scanner rotation. Radiology 1990; 176: 181-183.
  6. Koga T, Morikawa Y. Ultrasonographic determination of the splenic size and its clinical usefulness in various liver diseases. Radiology 1975; 115: 157-161.
  7. Ko JP, Marcus R, Bomsztyk E, Babb JS, Stefanescu C, Kaur M, Naidich DP, Rusinek H. Effect of blood vessels on measurement of nodule volume in a chest phantom. Radiology 2006; 239: 79-85. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2391041453
  8. Larici AR, Storto ML, Torge M, Mereu M, Molinari F, Maggi F, Bonomo L. Automated volumetry of pulmonary nodules on multidetector CT: influence of slice thickness, reconstruction algorithm and tube current. Preliminary results. Radiol Med 2008; 113: 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-008-0231-3
  9. Ney DR, Fishman EK, Magid D, Robertson DD, Kawashima A. Three-dimensional volumetric display of CT data: Effect of scan parameters upon image quality. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1991; 15: 875-885. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004728-199109000-00033
  10. Ost D, Fein AM, Feinsilver SH. Clinical practice. The solitary pulmonary nodule. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 2535-2542. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp012290
  11. Polacin A, Kalender WA, Marchal G. Evaluation of section sensitivity profiles and image noise in spiral CT. Radiology 1992; 185: 29-35.
  12. Prabhakar R, Ganesh T, Rath GK, Julka PK, Sridhar PS, Joshi RC, Thulkar S. Impact of different CT slice thickness on clinical target volume for 3D conformal radiation therapy. Med Dosim 2009; 34: 36-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2007.09.002
  13. Prionas ND, Ray S, Boone JM. Volume assessment accuracy in computed tomography: a phantom study. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2010; 11: 3037-3051.
  14. Puesken M, Buerke B, Fortkamp R, Koch R, Seifarth H, Heindel W, Wessling J. Liver lesion segmentation in MSCT: effect of slice thickness on segmentation quality, measurement precision and interobserver variability. Rofo 2011; 183: 372-380. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1245983
  15. Ravenel JG, Leue WM, Nietert PJ, Miller JV, Taylor KK, Silvestri GA. Pulmonary nodule volume: effects of reconstruction parameters on automated measurements - a phantom study. Radiology 2008; 247: 400-408. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2472070868
  16. Robinson DR, Bullen AW, Hall R, Brown RC, Baxter P, Losowsky MS. Splenic size and function in adult coeliac disease. Br J Radiol 1980; 53: 532-537. https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-53-630-532
  17. Vannier MW, Marsh JL, Warren JO. Three dimensional CT reconstruction images for craniofacial surgical planning and evaluation. Radiology 1984; 150: 179-184.
  18. Van Hoe L, Haven F, Bellon E, Baert AL, Bosmans H, Feron M, Suetens P, Marchal G. Factors influencing the accuracy of volume measurements in spiral CT: a phantom study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21: 332-338. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004728-199703000-00034
  19. Way TW, Chan HP, Goodsitt MM, Sahiner B, Hadjiiski LM, Zhou C, Chughtai A. Effect of CT scanning parameters on volumetric measurements of pulmonary nodules by 3D active contour segmentation: a phantom study. Phys Med Biol 2008; 53: 1295-1312. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/5/009
  20. Yankelevitz DF, Reeves AP, Kostis WJ, Zhao B, Henschke CI. Small pulmonary nodules: volumetrically determined growth rates based on CT evaluation. Radiology 2000; 217: 251-256. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.217.1.r00oc33251