TY - JOUR
T1 - Accuracy of Nodule Volume and Airway Wall Thickness Measurement Using Low-Dose Chest CT on a Photon-Counting Detector CT Scanner
AU - Dunning, Chelsea A.S.
AU - Marsh, Jeffrey F.
AU - Winfree, Timothy
AU - Rajendran, Kishore
AU - Leng, Shuai
AU - Levin, David L.
AU - Johnson, Tucker F.
AU - Fletcher, Joel G.
AU - McCollough, Cynthia H.
AU - Yu, Lifeng
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported in kind by Siemens Healthineers GmbH, who owns the evaluated system under the terms of a sponsored research agreement with the Mayo Clinic. Additional funding was provided by the Mayo Clinic Department of Radiology Scholarship program, the Nationals Institute of Health (R01 EB028590), and by the Mayo Clinic Graduate School of Biomedical Science. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Nationals Institute of Health. The authors wish to thank Mr Kevin Kimlinger for the assistance with manuscript preparation and the Mayo Clinic 3D Anatomic Modeling Laboratory for construction of the artificial airway tubes.
Funding Information:
Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: C.H.M. and J.G.F. receive research funding support from Siemens Healthcare.
Publisher Copyright:
© Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/4/1
Y1 - 2023/4/1
N2 - Objectives A comparison of high-resolution photon-counting detector computed tomography (PCD-CT) versus energy-integrating detector (EID) CT via a phantom study using low-dose chest CT to evaluate nodule volume and airway wall thickness quantification. Materials and Methods Twelve solid and ground-glass lung nodule phantoms with 3 diameters (5 mm, 8 mm, and 10 mm) and 2 shapes (spherical and star-shaped) and 12 airway tube phantoms (wall thicknesses, 0.27-1.54 mm) were placed in an anthropomorphic chest phantom. The phantom was scanned with EID-CT and PCD-CT at 5 dose levels (CTDIvol = 0.1-0.8 mGy at Sn-100 kV, 7.35 mGy at 120 kV). All images were iteratively reconstructed using matched kernels for EID-CT and medium-sharp kernel (MK) PCD-CT and an ultra-sharp kernel (USK) PCD-CT kernel, and image noise at each dose level was quantified. Nodule volumes were measured using semiautomated segmentation software, and the accuracy was expressed as the percentage error between segmented and reference volumes. Airway wall thicknesses were measured, and the root-mean-square error across all tubes was evaluated. Results MK PCD-CT images had the lowest noise. At 0.1 mGy, the mean volume accuracy for the solid and ground-glass nodules was improved in USK PCD-CT (3.1% and 3.3% error) compared with MK PCD-CT (9.9% and 10.2% error) and EID-CT images (11.4% and 9.2% error), respectively. At 0.2 mGy and 0.8 mGy, the wall thickness root-mean-square error values were 0.42 mm and 0.41 mm for EID-CT, 0.54 mm and 0.49 mm for MK PCD-CT, and 0.23 mm and 0.16 mm for USK PCD-CT. Conclusions USK PCD-CT provided more accurate lung nodule volume and airway wall thickness quantification at lower radiation dose compared with MK PCD-CT and EID-CT.
AB - Objectives A comparison of high-resolution photon-counting detector computed tomography (PCD-CT) versus energy-integrating detector (EID) CT via a phantom study using low-dose chest CT to evaluate nodule volume and airway wall thickness quantification. Materials and Methods Twelve solid and ground-glass lung nodule phantoms with 3 diameters (5 mm, 8 mm, and 10 mm) and 2 shapes (spherical and star-shaped) and 12 airway tube phantoms (wall thicknesses, 0.27-1.54 mm) were placed in an anthropomorphic chest phantom. The phantom was scanned with EID-CT and PCD-CT at 5 dose levels (CTDIvol = 0.1-0.8 mGy at Sn-100 kV, 7.35 mGy at 120 kV). All images were iteratively reconstructed using matched kernels for EID-CT and medium-sharp kernel (MK) PCD-CT and an ultra-sharp kernel (USK) PCD-CT kernel, and image noise at each dose level was quantified. Nodule volumes were measured using semiautomated segmentation software, and the accuracy was expressed as the percentage error between segmented and reference volumes. Airway wall thicknesses were measured, and the root-mean-square error across all tubes was evaluated. Results MK PCD-CT images had the lowest noise. At 0.1 mGy, the mean volume accuracy for the solid and ground-glass nodules was improved in USK PCD-CT (3.1% and 3.3% error) compared with MK PCD-CT (9.9% and 10.2% error) and EID-CT images (11.4% and 9.2% error), respectively. At 0.2 mGy and 0.8 mGy, the wall thickness root-mean-square error values were 0.42 mm and 0.41 mm for EID-CT, 0.54 mm and 0.49 mm for MK PCD-CT, and 0.23 mm and 0.16 mm for USK PCD-CT. Conclusions USK PCD-CT provided more accurate lung nodule volume and airway wall thickness quantification at lower radiation dose compared with MK PCD-CT and EID-CT.
KW - chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
KW - computed tomography
KW - dose reduction
KW - lung cancer
KW - pulmonary nodules
KW - x-ray
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85150177837&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85150177837&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000933
DO - 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000933
M3 - Article
C2 - 36525385
AN - SCOPUS:85150177837
SN - 0020-9996
VL - 58
SP - 283
EP - 292
JO - Investigative Radiology
JF - Investigative Radiology
IS - 4
ER -