A comparison of computed tomography, computed radiography, and film-screen radiography for the detection of canine pulmonary nodules

Veterinary Radiology and Ultrasound

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 258-265

  Alexander, Kate ^a   Joly, Hugo ^a   Blond, Laurent ^a   D'Anjou, Marc André ^a   Nadeau, Marie Ève ^a   Olive, Julien ^a   Beauchamp, Guy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Dogs; Nodule; Pulmonary; Radiography

Indexed keywords

CANIS FAMILIARIS;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISEASE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DOG; DOG DISEASE; IMAGE QUALITY; LUNG TUMOR; RADIOGRAPHY; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; X RAY FILM;

ANIMALS; DOG DISEASES; DOGS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; X-RAY INTENSIFYING SCREENS;

EID: 84865085135     PISSN: 10588183     EISSN: 17408261     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2012.01924.x     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Konen E, Greenberg I, Rozenman J. Visibility of normal thoracic anatomic landmarks on storage phosphor digital radiography versus conventional radiography. Isr Med Assoc J 2005;7:495-497.
2. Ganten M, Radeleff B, Kampschulte A, Daniels MD, Kauffmann GW, Hansmann J. Comparing image quality of flat-panel chest radiography with storage phosphor radiography and film-screen radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:171-176.
3. Nemanic S, London CA, Wisner ER. Comparison of thoracic radiographs and single breath-hold helical CT for detection of pulmonary nodules in dogs with metastatic neoplasia. J Vet Intern Med 2006;20:508-515.
4. Eberle N, Fork M, von Babo V, Nolte I, Simon D. Comparison of examination of thoracic radiographs and thoracic computed tomography in dogs with appendicular osteosarcoma. Vet Comp Oncol 2011;9:131-140.
5. Otoni CC, Rahal SC, Vulcano LC, et al. Survey radiography and computerized tomography imaging of the thorax in female dogs with mammary tumors. Acta Vet Scand 2010;52:20-29.
6. Lang J, Wortman J, Glickman L, Biery D, Rhodes W. Sensitivity of radiographic detection of lung metastases in the dog. Vet Radiol 1986;27:74-78.
7. Ober CP, Barber D. Comparison of two- vs. three-view thoracic radiographic studies on conspicuity of structured interstitial patterns in dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2006;47:542-545.
8. Armbrust LJ, Hoskinson JJ, Biller DS, Ostmeyer RM, Milliken GA, Choi J. Comparison of digitized and direct viewed (analog) radiographic images for detection of pulmonary nodules. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2005;46:361-367.
9. Joly H, d'Anjou MA, Alexander K, Beauchamp G. Comparison of single-slice computed tomography protocols for detection of pulmonary nodules in dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2009;50:279-284.
10. Bley TA, Baumann T, Saueressig U, et al. Comparison of radiologist and CAD performance in the detection of CT-confirmed subtle pulmonary nodules on digital chest radiographs. Invest Radiol 2008;43:343-348.
11. Leader JK, Warfel TE, Fuhrman CR, et al. Pulmonary nodule detection with low-dose CT of the lung: agreement among radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;185:973-978.
12. Fischbach F, Knollmann F, Griesshaber V, Freund T, Akkol E, Felix R. Detection of pulmonary nodules by multislice computed tomography: improved detection rate with reduced slice thickness. Eur Radiol 2003;13:2378-2383.
13. Lee HY, Goo JM, Lee HJ, et al. Usefulness of concurrent reading using thin-section and thick-section CT images in subcentimetre solitary pulmonary nodules. Clin Radiol 2009;64:127-132.
14. Karabulut N, Toru M, Gelebek V, Gulsun M, Ariyurek OM. Comparison of low-dose and standard-dose helical CT in the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. Eur Radiol 2002;12:2764-2769.
15. Cardinale L, Ardissone F, Novello S, et al. The pulmonary nodule: clinical and radiological characteristics affecting a diagnosis of malignancy. Radiol Med 2009;114:871-889.
16. Mansson LG, Kheddache S, Lanhede B, Tylen U. Image quality for five modern chest radiography techniques: a modified FROC study with an anthropomorphic chest phantom. Eur Radiol 1999;9:1826-1834.
17. Woodard PK, Slone RM, Sagel SS, et al. Detection of CT-proved pulmonary nodules: comparison of selenium-based digital and conventional screen-film chest radiographs. Radiology 1998;209:705-709.
18. Samei E, Flynn MJ, Peterson E, Eyler WR. Subtle lung nodules: influence of local anatomic variations on detection. Radiology 2003;228:76-84.
19. Burk R, Feeney D. Chapter 2: the thorax. In: Burk R, Feeney D (eds): Small animal radiology and ultrasonograhy: a diagnostic atlas and text. St-Louis, MO: Saunders, 2003;25-248.
20. Ahlberg N-E, Hoppe F, Kelter U, Svensson L. A comuted tomographic study of volume and X-ray attenuation of the lungs of beagles in various body positions. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1985;26:43-47.
21. Lord P, Gomez J. Lung lobe collapse: pathophysiology and radiologic significance. Vet Radiol 1985;26:187-195.
22. Waters D, Coakley F, Cohen M, et al. The detection of pulmonary metastases by helical CT: a clinicopathologic study in dogs. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998;22:235-240.
23. Reese DJ, Green EM, Zekas LJ, et al. Intra- and interobserver variability of board-certified veterinary radiologists and veterinary general practitioners for pulmonary nodule detection in standard and inverted display mode images of digital thoracic radiographs of dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 238:998-1003.
24. Robinson PJ. Radiology's Achilles' heel: error and variation in the interpretation of the Rontgen image. Br J Radiol 1997;70:1085-1098.
25. Hansson K, Haggstrom J, Kvart C, Lord P. Reader performance in radiographic diagnosis of signs of mitral regurgitation in cavalier King Charles spaniels. J Small Anim Pract 2009;50(Suppl 1):44-53.
26. Kundel HL, Polansky M. Measurement of observer agreement. Radiology 2003;228:303-308.