Subtle lung nodules: Influence of local anatomic variations on detection

Radiology

Volumn 228, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 76-84

  Samei, Ehsan ^a,b   Flynn, Michael J ^b   Peterson, Edward ^b   Eyler, William R ^b  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Diagnostic radiology, observer performance; Lung neoplasms, diagnosis; Lung, nodule; Radiography, digital; Thorax, radiography

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANATOMICAL VARIATION; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CONTRAST; FEMALE; HUMAN; LUNG NODULE; MALE; MORPHOLOGY; NORMAL HUMAN; OBSERVATION; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SIMULATION; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COIN LESION, PULMONARY; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THORAX;

EID: 0037700163     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2273020509     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 1999; 354:99-105.
2. Muhm JR, Miller WE, Fontana RS, Sanderson DR, Uhlenhopp MA. Lung cancer detected during a screening program using four-month chest radiographs. Radiology 1983; 148:561-565.
3. Murphy GP, Lawrence W Jr, Lenhard RE Jr. Clinical oncology. Washington, DC: American Cancer Society, 1995.
4. Zweirewich CV, Vedal S, Miller RR, Muller NL. Solitary pulmonary nodule: high-resolution CT and radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1991; 179:469-476.
5. Cancer facts and figures 2003. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society, 2003.
6. Rose A. The sensitivity performance of the human eye on an absolute scale. J Opt Soc Am 1948; 38:196-208.
7. Burgess AE, Wagner RF, Jennings RJ. Human signal detection performance for noisy medical images. IEEE Computer Society International Workshop on Medical Imaging 1982; 99-105.
8. Samei E, Eyler WR, Baron LF. Effects of anatomical structure on signal detection. In: Beutel J, Van Metter R, Kundel H, eds. Handbook of medical imaging. Vol 1, Physics and psychophysics. Bellingham, Wash: SPIE Press, 2000; 655-682.
9. Greening RG, Pendergrass EP. Postmortem roentgenography with particular emphasis upon the lung. Radiology 1954; 62:720-724.
10. Boynton RM, Bush WR. Recognition of forms against a complex background. J Opt Soc Am 1956; 46:758-764.
11. Revesz G, Kundel HL, Graber MA. The influence of structured noise on the detection of radiologic abnormalities. Invest Radiol 1974; 9:479-486.
12. Samei E, Flynn MJ, Eyler WR. Detection of subtle lung nodules: relative influence of quantum and anatomical noise on chest radiographs. Radiology 1999; 213:727-734.
13. Samei E, Flynn MJ, Eyler WR, Peterson E. The effect of local background anatomical patterns on the detection of subtle lung nodules in chest radiographs. Proc SPIE. 1998; 3340:44-54.
14. Samei E, Flynn MJ. An experimental comparison of detector performance for computed radiography systems. Med Phys 2002; 29:447-459.
15. Flynn MJ, Samei E. Experimental comparison of noise and resolution for 2k and 4k storage phosphor radiography systems. Med Phys 1999; 26:1612-1623.
16. Samei E, Flynn MJ, Eyler W. Simulation of subtle lung nodules in projection chest radiography. Radiology 1997; 202:117-124.
17. Samei E, Flynn MJ, Beute GH, Peterson E. Comparison of observer performance for real and simulated nodules in chest radiography. Proc SPIE 1996; 2712:60-70.
18. Holm S. A sample sequentially negative multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 1979; 6:65-70.
19. Seeley GW, Roehrig H, Hillman BJ. A computerized method for measurement of conspicuity: comparison of film and digital nephrograms. Invest Radiol 1984; 19:583-586.
20. Ruttimann UE, Webber RL. A simple model combining quantum noise and anatomical variation in radiographs. Med Phys 1984; 11:50-60.
21. Rolland JP, Barrett HH. Effect of random background inhomogeneity on observer detection performance. J Opt Soc Am A 1992; 9:649-658.
22. Burgess AE. Statistically defined backgrounds: performance of a modified non-prewhitening observer model. J Opt Soc Am A 1994; 11:1237-1242.
23. Judy PF, Swensson RG, Kijewsky MF. Observer detection efficiency of disk and Gaussian targets (abstr). Radiology 1995; 197:356.
24. Revesz G, Kutldel HL. Psychophysical studies of detection errors in chest radiology. Radiology 1977; 123:559-562.
25. Kutldel HL, Revesz G. Lesion conspicuity, structured noise, and film reader error. Am J Roentgenol 1976; 126:1233-1238.
26. Kundel HL, Revesz G, Toto L. Contrast gradient and the detection of lung nodules. Invest Radiol 1979; 14:18-22.
27. Hallberg JR, Kelsey CA, Briscoe D. Some effects of method on the measured conspicuity of chest lesions. Invest Radiol 1978; 13:439-443.
28. Brogdon BG, Mosdey RD, Kelsey CA, Hallberg JR. Perception of simulated lung lesions. Invest Radiol 1978; 13:12-15.
29. Revesz G. Conspicuity and uncertainty in the radiographic detection of lesions. Radiology 1985; 154:625-628.
30. Waring JJ, Wasson WW. The imperfections of the stereoscopic maneuver in radiography of the chest. Radiology 1926; 6:198-203.
31. Lehmann LA, Alvarez RE, Macovski A, et al. Generalized image combinations in dual kVp digital radiography. Med Phys 1981; 8:659-667.
32. Stewart BK, Huang HK. Single-exposure dual-energy computed radiography. Med Phys 1990; 17:866-875.
33. Kamimura R, Takashima T. Clinical application of single dual-energy subtraction technique with digital storage phosphor radiography. J Digit Imaging 1995; 8(1 suppl 1):21-24.
34. Ergutl DL, Mistretta CA, Brown DE, et al. Single-exposure dual-energy computed radiography: improved detection and processing. Radiology 1990; 174:242-249.
35. Kelcz F, Zink FE, Peppler WW, Kruger DG, Ergun DI, Mistretta CA. Conventional chest radiography vs dual-energy computed radiography in the detection and characterization of pulmonary nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 162:271-278.
36. Kido S, Ikezoe J, Naito H, et al. Clinical evaluation of pulmonary nodules with single-exposure dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with an iterative noise-reduction algorithm. Radiology 1995; 194:407-412.
37. Kelsey CA, Moseley RD, Mettler FA, Briscoe DE. Cost-effectiveness of stereoscopic radiographs in detection of lung nodules. Radiology 1982; 142:611-613.
38. Zwicker RD, Atari NA. Transverse tomosynthesis on a digital simulator. Med Phys 1997; 24:867-871.
39. Dobbins JT, Webber RL, Hames SM. Tomosynthesis for improved pulmonary nodule detection (abstr). Radiology 1998; 209(P):280.
40. Godfrey DJ, Warp RJ, Dobbins JT III. Optimization of matrix inverse tomosynthesis. Proc SPIE 2001; 4320:696-704.
41. Levitin J. Ten thousand chest examinations with the stereoscopic photoroentgen unit. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1943; 49:469-475.
42. Batson OV, Carpentier VE. Stereoscopic depth perception. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1944; 51:202-204.
43. Daves ML, Dalrymple GV. Objective stereoscopy. Radiology 1962; 78:802-805.
44. Lewis I, Morgan RH. The value of stereoscopy in mass radiography of the chest. Radiology 1946; 46:171-172.
45. Samei E, Catarious DM, Baydush AB, Floyd CE, Vargas-Voracek R. Bi-plane correlation imaging for improved detection of lung nodules. Proc SPIE (in press).