Usefulness Evaluation of Low-dose CT for Emphysema : Compared with High-resolution CT
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of low-dose CT (LDCT) for emphysema compared with high-resolution CT (HRCT). Measurements of radiation dose and noise were repeated 3 times in same exposure condition which was similar with obtaining HRCT and LDCT images. We analysed reading results of 146 subjects. Six images per participants selected for emphysema grading. Emphysema was graded for all 6 zones on the left and right sides of the lungs by the consensus reading of two chest radiologists using a 4-point scale. Between the HRCT and LDCT images, diagnostic differences and agreements for emphysema were analyzed by McNemar’s and unweighted kappa tests, and radiation doses and noise by a Mann–Whitney U-test, using the SPSS 19.0 program. Radiation dose from HRCT was significantly higher than that of LDCT, but the noise was significantly lower in HRCT than in LDCT. Diagnostic agreement for emphysema between HRCT and LDCT images was excellent (k-value=0.88). Emphysema grading scores were not significantly different between HRCT and LDCT images for all six lung zones. Emphysema grading scores from LDCT images were significantly correlated with increased scores on HRCT images (r=0.599, p <0.001). Considering the tradeoff between radiation dose and image noise, LDCT could be used as the gold standard method instead of HRCT for emphysema detection and grading.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of low-dose CT (LDCT) for emphysema compared with high-resolution CT (HRCT). Measurements of radiation dose and noise were repeated 3 times in same exposure condition which was similar with obtaining HRCT and LDCT images. We analysed reading results of 146 subjects. Six images per participants selected for emphysema grading. Emphysema was graded for all 6 zones on the left and right sides of the lungs by the consensus reading of two chest radiologists using a 4-point scale. Between the HRCT and LDCT images, diagnostic differences and agreements for emphysema were analyzed by McNemar’s and unweighted kappa tests, and radiation doses and noise by a Mann–Whitney U-test, using the SPSS 19.0 program. Radiation dose from HRCT was significantly higher than that of LDCT, but the noise was significantly lower in HRCT than in LDCT. Diagnostic agreement for emphysema between HRCT and LDCT images was excellent (k-value=0.88). Emphysema grading scores were not significantly different between HRCT and LDCT images for all six lung zones. Emphysema grading scores from LDCT images were significantly correlated with increased scores on HRCT images (r=0.599, p <0.001). Considering the tradeoff between radiation dose and image noise, LDCT could be used as the gold standard method instead of HRCT for emphysema detection and grading.
참고문헌 (21)
- Takahashi M, "Imaging of pulmonary emphysema: a pictorial review", Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis, 3(2), pp.193~204 (2008)
- MMller NL, "“Density mask”. An objective method to quantitate emphysema using computed tomography", Chest, 94(4), pp.782~787 (1988)
- Kuwano K, "The diagnosis of mild emphysema. Correlation of computed tomography and pathology scores", Am Rev Respir Dis, 141(1), pp.169~178 (1990)
- Bankier AA, "Pulmonary emphysema: subjective visual grading versus objective quantification with macroscopic morphometry and thin-section CT densitometry", Radiology, 211(3), pp.851~858 (1999)
- Kusaka Y, "International Classification of HRCT for Occupational and Environmental Respiratory Diseases" (2005), Springer-Verlag
- Suganuma N, "Reliability of the proposed international classification of high-resolution computed tomography for occupational and environmental respiratory diseases", J Occup Health, 51(3), pp.210~222 (2009)
- Blum T, "Computed tomography for diagnosis and grading of dust-induced occupational lung disease", Curr Opin Pulm Med, 14(2), pp.135~140 (2008)
- Majurin ML, "High-resolution CT of the lung in asbestos-exposed subjects. Comparison of low-dose and high-dose HRCT", Acta Radiol, 35(5), pp.473~477 (1994)
- Huda W, "Radiation doses and risks in chest computed tomography examinations", Proc Am Thorac Soc, 4(4), pp.316~320 (2007)
- Smith-Bindman R, "Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer", Arch Intern Med, 169(22), pp.2078~2086 (2009)
- Rumack CM, "2010 ACR presidential address, patient-focused radiology: Taking charge of radiation dose", J Am Coll Radiol, 7(11), pp.837~844 (2010)
- Naidich DP, "Low-dose CT of the lungs: preliminary observations", Radiology, 175(3), pp.729~731 (1990)
- Takahashi M, "Low-Dose Spiral Computed Tomography of the Thorax Comparison with the Standard-Dose Technique", Invest Radiol, 33(2), pp.68~73 (1998)
- Fasola G, "Low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer and pleural mesothelioma in an asbestos-exposed population:baseline results of a prospective, nonrandomized feasibility trial--an Alpe-adria Thoracic Oncology Multidisciplinary Group Study", Oncologist, 12(10), pp.1215~1224 (2007)
- 이원정, "분진에 노출되었던 집단의 흉부 저선량 CT영상 소견", 방사선기술과학, 34(4), pp.305~314 (2011), 대한방사선과학회
- Gierada DS, "Comparison of standard- and low-radiation-dose CT for quantification of emphysema", AJR Am J Roentgenol, 188(1), pp.42~47 (2007)
- Nishio M, "Emphysema quantification by low-dose CT: potential impact of adaptive iterative dose reduction using 3D processing", AJR Am J Roentgenol, 199(3), pp.595~601 (2012)
- Sverzellati N, "Relationship and prognostic value of modified coronary artery calcium score, FEV1, and emphysema in lung cancer screening population: the MILD trial", Radiology, 262(2), pp.460~467 (2012)
- Goldman LW, "Principles of CT: radiation dose and image quality", J Nucl Med Technol, 35(4), pp.213~225 (2007)
- Horiuchi N, "Low-dose multislice CT and high-resolution CT assessment of pulmonary emphysema in public school teachers", Lung, 185(1), pp.25~30 (2007)
- Gevenois PA, "Macroscopic assessment of pulmonary emphysema by image analysis", J Clin Pathol, 48(4), pp.318~322 (1995)