Quality assessment for CT colonography

Validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid

Keshav K. Deshpande, Ronald M. Summers, Robert L. Van Uitert, Marek Franaszek, Linda Brown, Andrew J. Dwyer, Joel Garland Fletcher, J. Richard Choi, Perry J. Pickhardt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to validate automated quality assessment (QA) software for CT colonography (CTC) by comparing results obtained with the software with results of interpretation by radiologists in the assessment of colonic distention and surface area obscured by residual fluid. MATERIALS AND METHODS. CTC scans of 30 patients were selected retrospectively to span ranges of luminal distention (well distended to poorly distended) and surface area covered by residual fluid (high amount of coverage to low amount of coverage). We used QA software developed in our laboratory to automatically measure the mean distention of each of five colonic segments (ascending, transverse, descending, sigmoid, and rectum). Three experienced radiologists visually graded each scan for distention and fluid coverage. Distention and fluid scores for specific segments were assessed with Bland-Altman analysis (mean difference with 95% limits of agreement) and the weighted kappa test. Interobserver and intraobserver variability was determined with the weighted kappa test. RESULTS. For distention scoring, the mean difference between radiologists and the QA software was 0.1% (95% limits of agreement, -25.6% and 25.9%). For fluid scoring, the mean difference was -0.6% (95% limits of agreement, -8.2% and 7.1%). There was moderate to good agreement (weighted kappa value, 0.50-0.78) between the radiologists' mean scores and the scores obtained with the QA software and for interreader and intrareader assessments of distention and fluid coverage. CONCLUSION. Results with the QA software agreed with radiologists' assessment of colonic distention and residual fluid coverage but were a more objective assessment. Use of this QA software can help standardize two important factors, distention and residual fluid coverage, that affect the quality of CTC, reducing two known causes of poor CTC performance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1457-1463
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume189
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2007

Fingerprint

Computed Tomographic Colonography
Software
Observer Variation
Sigmoid Colon
Rectum
Radiologists

Keywords

  • Colon
  • Colonography
  • CT
  • Quality
  • Virtual colonoscopy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Deshpande, K. K., Summers, R. M., Van Uitert, R. L., Franaszek, M., Brown, L., Dwyer, A. J., ... Pickhardt, P. J. (2007). Quality assessment for CT colonography: Validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid. American Journal of Roentgenology, 189(6), 1457-1463. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2327

Quality assessment for CT colonography : Validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid. / Deshpande, Keshav K.; Summers, Ronald M.; Van Uitert, Robert L.; Franaszek, Marek; Brown, Linda; Dwyer, Andrew J.; Fletcher, Joel Garland; Choi, J. Richard; Pickhardt, Perry J.

In: American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 189, No. 6, 12.2007, p. 1457-1463.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Deshpande, KK, Summers, RM, Van Uitert, RL, Franaszek, M, Brown, L, Dwyer, AJ, Fletcher, JG, Choi, JR & Pickhardt, PJ 2007, 'Quality assessment for CT colonography: Validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid', American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 189, no. 6, pp. 1457-1463. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2327
Deshpande, Keshav K. ; Summers, Ronald M. ; Van Uitert, Robert L. ; Franaszek, Marek ; Brown, Linda ; Dwyer, Andrew J. ; Fletcher, Joel Garland ; Choi, J. Richard ; Pickhardt, Perry J. / Quality assessment for CT colonography : Validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid. In: American Journal of Roentgenology. 2007 ; Vol. 189, No. 6. pp. 1457-1463.
@article{afb170eb35b540aaa3a18d2219096e72,
title = "Quality assessment for CT colonography: Validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to validate automated quality assessment (QA) software for CT colonography (CTC) by comparing results obtained with the software with results of interpretation by radiologists in the assessment of colonic distention and surface area obscured by residual fluid. MATERIALS AND METHODS. CTC scans of 30 patients were selected retrospectively to span ranges of luminal distention (well distended to poorly distended) and surface area covered by residual fluid (high amount of coverage to low amount of coverage). We used QA software developed in our laboratory to automatically measure the mean distention of each of five colonic segments (ascending, transverse, descending, sigmoid, and rectum). Three experienced radiologists visually graded each scan for distention and fluid coverage. Distention and fluid scores for specific segments were assessed with Bland-Altman analysis (mean difference with 95{\%} limits of agreement) and the weighted kappa test. Interobserver and intraobserver variability was determined with the weighted kappa test. RESULTS. For distention scoring, the mean difference between radiologists and the QA software was 0.1{\%} (95{\%} limits of agreement, -25.6{\%} and 25.9{\%}). For fluid scoring, the mean difference was -0.6{\%} (95{\%} limits of agreement, -8.2{\%} and 7.1{\%}). There was moderate to good agreement (weighted kappa value, 0.50-0.78) between the radiologists' mean scores and the scores obtained with the QA software and for interreader and intrareader assessments of distention and fluid coverage. CONCLUSION. Results with the QA software agreed with radiologists' assessment of colonic distention and residual fluid coverage but were a more objective assessment. Use of this QA software can help standardize two important factors, distention and residual fluid coverage, that affect the quality of CTC, reducing two known causes of poor CTC performance.",
keywords = "Colon, Colonography, CT, Quality, Virtual colonoscopy",
author = "Deshpande, {Keshav K.} and Summers, {Ronald M.} and {Van Uitert}, {Robert L.} and Marek Franaszek and Linda Brown and Dwyer, {Andrew J.} and Fletcher, {Joel Garland} and Choi, {J. Richard} and Pickhardt, {Perry J.}",
year = "2007",
month = "12",
doi = "10.2214/AJR.07.2327",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "189",
pages = "1457--1463",
journal = "American Journal of Roentgenology",
issn = "0361-803X",
publisher = "American Roentgen Ray Society",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quality assessment for CT colonography

T2 - Validation of automated measurement of colonic distention and residual fluid

AU - Deshpande, Keshav K.

AU - Summers, Ronald M.

AU - Van Uitert, Robert L.

AU - Franaszek, Marek

AU - Brown, Linda

AU - Dwyer, Andrew J.

AU - Fletcher, Joel Garland

AU - Choi, J. Richard

AU - Pickhardt, Perry J.

PY - 2007/12

Y1 - 2007/12

N2 - OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to validate automated quality assessment (QA) software for CT colonography (CTC) by comparing results obtained with the software with results of interpretation by radiologists in the assessment of colonic distention and surface area obscured by residual fluid. MATERIALS AND METHODS. CTC scans of 30 patients were selected retrospectively to span ranges of luminal distention (well distended to poorly distended) and surface area covered by residual fluid (high amount of coverage to low amount of coverage). We used QA software developed in our laboratory to automatically measure the mean distention of each of five colonic segments (ascending, transverse, descending, sigmoid, and rectum). Three experienced radiologists visually graded each scan for distention and fluid coverage. Distention and fluid scores for specific segments were assessed with Bland-Altman analysis (mean difference with 95% limits of agreement) and the weighted kappa test. Interobserver and intraobserver variability was determined with the weighted kappa test. RESULTS. For distention scoring, the mean difference between radiologists and the QA software was 0.1% (95% limits of agreement, -25.6% and 25.9%). For fluid scoring, the mean difference was -0.6% (95% limits of agreement, -8.2% and 7.1%). There was moderate to good agreement (weighted kappa value, 0.50-0.78) between the radiologists' mean scores and the scores obtained with the QA software and for interreader and intrareader assessments of distention and fluid coverage. CONCLUSION. Results with the QA software agreed with radiologists' assessment of colonic distention and residual fluid coverage but were a more objective assessment. Use of this QA software can help standardize two important factors, distention and residual fluid coverage, that affect the quality of CTC, reducing two known causes of poor CTC performance.

AB - OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to validate automated quality assessment (QA) software for CT colonography (CTC) by comparing results obtained with the software with results of interpretation by radiologists in the assessment of colonic distention and surface area obscured by residual fluid. MATERIALS AND METHODS. CTC scans of 30 patients were selected retrospectively to span ranges of luminal distention (well distended to poorly distended) and surface area covered by residual fluid (high amount of coverage to low amount of coverage). We used QA software developed in our laboratory to automatically measure the mean distention of each of five colonic segments (ascending, transverse, descending, sigmoid, and rectum). Three experienced radiologists visually graded each scan for distention and fluid coverage. Distention and fluid scores for specific segments were assessed with Bland-Altman analysis (mean difference with 95% limits of agreement) and the weighted kappa test. Interobserver and intraobserver variability was determined with the weighted kappa test. RESULTS. For distention scoring, the mean difference between radiologists and the QA software was 0.1% (95% limits of agreement, -25.6% and 25.9%). For fluid scoring, the mean difference was -0.6% (95% limits of agreement, -8.2% and 7.1%). There was moderate to good agreement (weighted kappa value, 0.50-0.78) between the radiologists' mean scores and the scores obtained with the QA software and for interreader and intrareader assessments of distention and fluid coverage. CONCLUSION. Results with the QA software agreed with radiologists' assessment of colonic distention and residual fluid coverage but were a more objective assessment. Use of this QA software can help standardize two important factors, distention and residual fluid coverage, that affect the quality of CTC, reducing two known causes of poor CTC performance.

KW - Colon

KW - Colonography

KW - CT

KW - Quality

KW - Virtual colonoscopy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=36448973048&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=36448973048&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2214/AJR.07.2327

DO - 10.2214/AJR.07.2327

M3 - Article

VL - 189

SP - 1457

EP - 1463

JO - American Journal of Roentgenology

JF - American Journal of Roentgenology

SN - 0361-803X

IS - 6

ER -