title: Variability of semiautomated lung nodule volumetry on ultralow-dose CT: comparison with nodule volumetry on standard-dose CT.
abstract: The study investigates the effect of a substantial dose reduction on the variability of lung nodule volume measurements by assessing and comparing nodule volumes using a dedicated semiautomated segmentation software on ultralow-dose computed tomography (ULD-CT) and standard-dose computed tomography (SD-CT) data. In 20 patients, thin-slice chest CT datasets (1 mm slice thickness; 20% reconstruction overlap) were acquired at ultralow-dose (120 kV, 5 mAs) and at standard-dose (120 kV, 75 mAs), respectively, and analyzed using the segmentation software OncoTREAT (MeVis, Bremen, Germany; version 1.3). Interobserver variability of volume measurements of 202 solid pulmonary nodules (mean diameter 11 mm, range 3.2-44.5 mm) was calculated for SD-CT and ULD-CT. With respect to interobserver variability, the 95% confidence interval for the relative differences in nodule volume in the intrascan analysis was measured with -9.7% to 8.3% (mean difference -0.7%) for SD-CT and with -12.6% to 12.4% (mean difference -0.2%) for ULD-CT. In the interscan analysis, the 95% confidence intervals for the differences in nodule volume ranged with -25.1% to -23.4% and 26.2% to 28.9% (mean difference 1.4% to 2.1%) dependent on the combination of readers and scans. Intrascan interobserver variability of volume measurements was comparable for ULD-CT and SD-CT data. The calculated variability of volume measurements in the interscan analysis was similar to the data reported in the literature for CT data acquired with equal radiation dose. Thus, the evaluated segmentation software provides nodule volumetry that appears to be independent of the dose level with which the CT source dataset is acquired.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology, Charité Campus Mitte, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. patrick.hein@charite.de
authors.forename: Patrick A
authors.initials: PA
authors.lastname: Hein
authors.forename: Valentina C
authors.initials: VC
authors.lastname: Romano
authors.forename: Patrik
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Rogalla
authors.forename: Christian
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Klessen
authors.forename: Alexander
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Lembcke
authors.forename: Lars
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Bornemann
authors.forename: Volker
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Dicken
authors.forename: Bernd
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Hamm
authors.forename: Hans-Christian
authors.initials: HC
authors.lastname: Bauknecht
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D001331:Automation; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008175:Lung Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D008297:Male; D015588:Observer Variation; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D011857:Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012984:Software; D003074:Solitary Pulmonary Nodule / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*
references.citation: Radiology. 2004 May;231(2):453-8
references.pmid: 15128990
references.citation: Radiology. 2000 Oct;217(1):251-6
references.pmid: 11012453
references.citation: IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2006 Apr;25(4):417-34
references.pmid: 16608058
references.citation: Radiology. 2006 Oct;241(1):251-7
references.pmid: 16908677
references.citation: Radiographics. 2005 May-Jun;25(3):841-8
references.pmid: 15888630
references.citation: Radiology. 2003 Mar;226(3):756-61
references.pmid: 12601181
references.citation: Rofo. 2007 Mar;179(3):276-81
references.pmid: 17325995
references.citation: Radiology. 2004 May;231(2):459-66
references.pmid: 15128991
references.citation: Radiol Med. 2006 Apr;111(3):343-54
references.pmid: 16683082
references.citation: Radiol Med. 2008 Feb;113(1):29-42
references.pmid: 18338125
references.citation: Radiology. 2005 Oct;237(1):83-8
references.pmid: 16126923
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004 Nov;183(5):1217-23
references.pmid: 15505280
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006 Apr;186(4):989-94
references.pmid: 16554568
references.citation: Invest Radiol. 2007 May;42(5):297-302
references.pmid: 17414525
references.citation: Radiology. 2008 May;247(2):400-8
references.pmid: 18430874
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2000;10(5):710-3
references.pmid: 10823619
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2004 Jan;14(1):86-92
references.pmid: 14615902
references.citation: Eur J Radiol. 2007 Nov;64(2):285-95
references.pmid: 17433595
references.citation: Radiology. 2002 Mar;222(3):773-81
references.pmid: 11867800
references.citation: Cancer Sci. 2003 Nov;94(11):1015-20
references.pmid: 14611681
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jul 1;21(13):2574-82
references.pmid: 12829678
references.citation: Radiology. 2003 Sep;228(3):864-70
references.pmid: 12954901
references.citation: Radiology. 2005 Jun;235(3):850-6
references.pmid: 15914478
references.citation: Radiology. 2003 Oct;229(1):184-94
references.pmid: 14519875