Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effect of the High-Pitch Mode in Dual-Source Computed Tomography on the Accuracy of Three-Dimensional Volumetry of Solid Pulmonary Nodules: A Phantom Study

  • Hwang, Sung Ho (Department of Radiology, Korea University Anam Hospital) ;
  • Oh, Yu-Whan (Department of Radiology, Korea University Anam Hospital) ;
  • Ham, Soo-Youn (Department of Radiology, Korea University Anam Hospital) ;
  • Kang, Eun-Young (Department of Radiology, Korea University Guro Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Ki Yeol (Department of Radiology, Korea University Ansan Hospital)
  • Received : 2014.09.05
  • Accepted : 2015.02.16
  • Published : 2015.06.01
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the influence of high-pitch mode (HPM) in dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) on the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) volumetry for solid pulmonary nodules. Materials and Methods: A lung phantom implanted with 45 solid pulmonary nodules (n = 15 for each of 4-mm, 6-mm, and 8-mm in diameter) was scanned twice, first in conventional pitch mode (CPM) and then in HPM using DSCT. The relative percentage volume errors (RPEs) of 3D volumetry were compared between the HPM and CPM. In addition, the intermode volume variability (IVV) of 3D volumetry was calculated. Results: In the measurement of the 6-mm and 8-mm nodules, there was no significant difference in RPE (p > 0.05, respectively) between the CPM and HPM (IVVs of $1.2{\pm}0.9%$, and $1.7{\pm}1.5%$, respectively). In the measurement of the 4-mm nodules, the mean RPE in the HPM ($35.1{\pm}7.4%$) was significantly greater (p < 0.01) than that in the CPM ($18.4{\pm}5.3%$), with an IVV of $13.1{\pm}6.6%$. However, the IVVs were in an acceptable range (< 25%), regardless of nodule size. Conclusion: The accuracy of 3D volumetry with HPM for solid pulmonary nodule is comparable to that with CPM. However, the use of HPM may adversely affect the accuracy of 3D volumetry for smaller (< 5 mm in diameter) nodule.

Keywords

References

  1. Libby DM, Smith JP, Altorki NK, Pasmantier MW, Yankelevitz D, Henschke CI. Managing the small pulmonary nodule discovered by CT. Chest 2004;125:1522-1529 https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.125.4.1522
  2. Tan BB, Flaherty KR, Kazerooni EA, Iannettoni MD; American College of Chest Physicians. The solitary pulmonary nodule. Chest 2003;123(1 Suppl):89S-96S https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.123.1_suppl.89S
  3. Diederich S, Hansen J, Wormanns D. Resolving small pulmonary nodules: CT features. Eur Radiol 2005;15:2064-2069 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2836-4
  4. Nathan MH, Collins VP, Adams RA. Differentiation of benign and malignant pulmonary nodules by growth rate. Radiology 1962;79:221-232 https://doi.org/10.1148/79.2.221
  5. Weiss W. Peripheral measurable bronchogenic carcinoma. Growth rate and period of risk after therapy. Am Rev Respir Dis 1971;103:198-208
  6. Kostis WJ, Reeves AP, Yankelevitz DF, Henschke CI. Threedimensional segmentation and growth-rate estimation of small pulmonary nodules in helical CT images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003;22:1259-1274 https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2003.817785
  7. Marten K, Auer F, Schmidt S, Kohl G, Rummeny EJ, Engelke C. Inadequacy of manual measurements compared to automated CT volumetry in assessment of treatment response of pulmonary metastases using RECIST criteria. Eur Radiol 2006;16:781-790 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0036-x
  8. Lell M, Hinkmann F, Anders K, Deak P, Kalender WA, Uder M, et al. High-pitch electrocardiogram-triggered computed tomography of the chest: initial results. Invest Radiol 2009;44:728-733 https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181b9df7e
  9. Baumueller S, Alkadhi H, Stolzmann P, Frauenfelder T, Goetti R, Schertler T, et al. Computed tomography of the lung in the high-pitch mode: is breath holding still required? Invest Radiol 2011;46:240-245 https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181feee1a
  10. Das M, Ley-Zaporozhan J, Gietema HA, Czech A, Muhlenbruch G, Mahnken AH, et al. Accuracy of automated volumetry of pulmonary nodules across different multislice CT scanners. Eur Radiol 2007;17:1979-1984 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0562-1
  11. Das M, Muhlenbruch G, Katoh M, Bakai A, Salganicoff M, Stanzel S, et al. Automated volumetry of solid pulmonary nodules in a phantom: accuracy across different CT scanner technologies. Invest Radiol 2007;42:297-302 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.rli.0000258683.20123.c4
  12. Szucs-Farkas Z, Kurmann L, Strautz T, Patak MA, Vock P, Schindera ST. Patient exposure and image quality of low-dose pulmonary computed tomography angiography: comparison of 100- and 80-kVp protocols. Invest Radiol 2008;43:871-876 https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181875e86
  13. Coenen A, Honda O, van der Jagt EJ, Tomiyama N. Computerassisted solid lung nodule 3D volumetry on CT: influence of scan mode and iterative reconstruction: a CT phantom study. Jpn J Radiol 2013;31:677-684 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-013-0235-3
  14. Wormanns D, Kohl G, Klotz E, Marheine A, Beyer F, Heindel W, et al. Volumetric measurements of pulmonary nodules at multi-row detector CT: in vivo reproducibility. Eur Radiol 2004;14:86-92 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-2132-0
  15. Funaki A, Ohkubo M, Wada S, Murao K, Matsumoto T, Niizuma S. Application of CT-PSF-based computer-simulated lung nodules for evaluating the accuracy of computer-aided volumetry. Radiol Phys Technol 2012;5:166-171 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-012-0150-9
  16. Willemink MJ, Leiner T, Budde RP, de Kort FP, Vliegenthart R, van Ooijen PM, et al. Systematic error in lung nodule volumetry: effect of iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection at different CT parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199:1241-1246 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.8727
  17. Wiemker R, Rogalla P, Blaffert T, Sifri D, Hay O, Shah E, et al. Aspects of computer-aided detection (CAD) and volumetry of pulmonary nodules using multislice CT. Br J Radiol 2005;78 Spec No 1:S46-S56 https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/30281702
  18. Christe A, Torrente JC, Lin M, Yen A, Hallett R, Roychoudhury K, et al. CT screening and follow-up of lung nodules: effects of tube current-time setting and nodule size and density on detectability and of tube current-time setting on apparent size. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:623-630 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.5288

Cited by

  1. Lung nodules: size still matters vol.26, pp.146, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0025-2017