Benefit of Overlapping Reconstruction for Improving the Quantitative Assessment of CT Lung Nodule Volume

Academic Radiology

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 173-180

  Gavrielides, Marios A ^a   Zeng, Rongping ^a   Myers, Kyle J ^a   Sahiner, Berkman ^a   Petrick, Nicholas ^a  

^a CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Lung nodules; Overlapping; Phantom study; Quantitative imaging; Reconstruction; Size change; Volumetric assessment

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; COLLIMATOR; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; LUNG MODEL; LUNG NODULE; LUNG NODULE VOLUME; OVERLAPPING RECONSTRUCTION; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPIRATORY TRACT PARAMETERS; THICKNESS; VASCULARIZATION;

ALGORITHMS; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; LUNG NEOPLASMS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOLITARY PULMONARY NODULE; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TUMOR BURDEN;

EID: 84873526859     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: 18784046     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2012.08.014     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Therasse P., Arbuck S.G., Eisenhauer E.A., et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000, 92:205-216.
2. Eisenhauer E.A., Therasse P., Bogaerts J., et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009, 45:228-247.
3. Gavrielides M.A., Kinnard L.M., Myers K.J., et al. Non-calcified lung nodules: volumetric assessment with thoracic CT. Radiology 2009, 251:26-37.
4. McNitt-Gray M.F., Bidaut L.M., Armato S.G., et al. CT assessment of response to therapy: tumor volume change measurement, truth data and error. Translat Oncol 2009, 2:216-222.
5. Meyer C.R., Armato S.G., Fenimore C.P., et al. Quantitative imaging to assess tumor response to therapy: common themes of measurement, truth data, and error sources. Translat Oncol 2009, 2:198-210.
6. Leung A.N. Spiral CT of the thorax in daily practice: optimization of technique. J Thorac Imaging 1997, 12:2-10.
7. Kalender W.A., Polacin A., Süss C. A comparison of conventional and spiral CT: an experimental study on the detection of spherical lesions. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1994, 18:167-176.
8. Wang G., Vannier M.W. Longitudinal resolution in volumetric x-ray computerized tomography-analytical comparison between conventional and helical computerized tomography. Med Phys 1994, 21:429-433.
9. Urban B.A., Fishman E.K., Kuhlman J.E., et al. Detection of focal hepatic lesions with spiral CT: comparison of 4-and 8-mm interscan spacing. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993, 160:783.
10. Diederich S., Lentschig M.G., Winter F., et al. Detection of pulmonary nodules with overlapping vs non-overlapping image reconstruction at spiral CT. Eur Radiol 1999, 9:281-286.
11. Buckley J.A., Scott W.W., Siegelman S.S., et al. Pulmonary nodules: effect of increased data sampling on detection with spiral CT and confidence in diagnosis. Radiology 1995, 196:395-400.
12. Kim J.S., Kim J.H., Cho G., et al. Automated detection of pulmonary nodules on CT images: effect of section thickness and reconstruction interval-initial results. Radiology 2005, 236:295-299.
13. Honda O., Sumikawa H., Johkoh T., et al. Computer-assisted lung nodule volumetry from multi-detector row CT: influence of image reconstruction parameters. Eur J Radiol 2007, 62:106-113.
14. Ravenel J.G., Leue W.M., Nietert P.J., et al. Pulmonary nodule volume: effects of reconstruction parameters on automated measurements-a phantom study. Radiology 2008, 247:400-408.
15. Goo J.M., Tongdee T., Tongdee R., et al. Volumetric measurement of synthetic lung nodules with multi-detector row CT: effect of various image reconstruction parameters and segmentation thresholds on measurement accuracy. Radiology 2005, 235:850-856.
16. Xu D.M., van Klaveren R.J., de Bock G.H., et al. Limited value of shape, margin and CT density in the discrimination between benign and malignant screen detected solid pulmonary nodules of the NELSON trial. Eur J Radiol 2008, 68:347-352.
17. Gavrielides M.A., Zeng R., Kinnard L.M., et al. Information-theoretic approach for analyzing bias and variance in lung nodule size estimation. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010, 29:1795-1807.
18. Winer-Muram H.T., Jennings S.G., Meyer C.A., et al. Effect of varying CT section width on volumetric measurement of lung tumors and application of compensatory equations. Radiology 2003, 229:184-194.
19. Wang G., Brink J.A., Vannier M.W. Theoretical FWTM values in helical CT. Med Phys 1994, 21:753.
20. Kasales C.J., Hopper K.D., Ariola D.N., et al. Reconstructed helical CT scans: improvement in z-axis resolution compared with overlapped and nonoverlapped conventional CT scans. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995, 164:1281.
21. Kostis W.J., Reeves A.P., Yankelevitz D.F., et al. Three-dimensional segmentation and growth-rate estimation of small pulmonary nodules in helical CT images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003, 22:1259-1274.
22. Gavrielides M.A., Kinnard L.M., Myers K.J., et al. A resource for the assessment of lung nodule size estimation methods: database of thoracic CT scans of an anthropomorphic phantom. Opt Express 2010, 18:15244-15255.