Journal of radiological science and technology (대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학)

Korean Society of Radiological Science (대한방사선과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Usefulness Evaluation of Low-dose CT for Emphysema : Compared with High-resolution CT

폐기종에 대한 저선량 CT의 유용성 평가: 고해상도 CT와 비교

  • Lee, Won-Jeong (Dept. of Radiological Technology, Daejeon Health Institute of Technology)
  • 이원정 (대전보건대학교 방사선과)
  • Received : 2016.06.29
  • Accepted : 2016.09.18
  • Published : 2016.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of low-dose CT (LDCT) for emphysema compared with high-resolution CT (HRCT). Measurements of radiation dose and noise were repeated 3 times in same exposure condition which was similar with obtaining HRCT and LDCT images. We analysed reading results of 146 subjects. Six images per participants selected for emphysema grading. Emphysema was graded for all 6 zones on the left and right sides of the lungs by the consensus reading of two chest radiologists using a 4-point scale. Between the HRCT and LDCT images, diagnostic differences and agreements for emphysema were analyzed by McNemar's and unweighted kappa tests, and radiation doses and noise by a Mann-Whitney U-test, using the SPSS 19.0 program. Radiation dose from HRCT was significantly higher than that of LDCT, but the noise was significantly lower in HRCT than in LDCT. Diagnostic agreement for emphysema between HRCT and LDCT images was excellent (k-value=0.88). Emphysema grading scores were not significantly different between HRCT and LDCT images for all six lung zones. Emphysema grading scores from LDCT images were significantly correlated with increased scores on HRCT images (r=0.599, p < 0.001). Considering the tradeoff between radiation dose and image noise, LDCT could be used as the gold standard method instead of HRCT for emphysema detection and grading.

본 연구에서는 폐기종에 대해 고해상도 CT와 비교한 저선량 CT 의 유용성에 대해 평가하였다. 고해상도 CT와 저선량 CT 노출조건에서 선량과 영상 잡음을 3회 반복 측정하였다. 비슷한 노출조건에서 획득한 146명의 고해상도 CT와 저선량 CT 영상에 대해 2명의 흉부영상의학과전문의 합의 판독결과에서 폐기종 소견 만을 본 연구에 사용하였다. SPSS ver. 19.0 프로그램 사용하여 고해상도 CT와 저선량 CT 간에 폐기종에 대한 진단 차이는 McNemar's tests, 일치도는 unweighted kappa tests, 선량과 잡음 차이는 Mann-Whitney U-test 로 분석하였다. 선량은 고해상도 CT가 저선량 CT 보다 높았지만(1.95 mGy vs. 0.35 mGy, p=0.008), 잡음은 낮았다(40.1 HU vs. 99.6 HU, p=0.021). 폐기종 진단에 대해서는 두 영상 간에 높은 일치도를 보였다(k-value=0.88). 폐기종 점수는 두 영상 간에 통계적인 유의한 차이를 보이지 않았고, 높은 상관성을 보였다(r=0.599, p < 0.001). 선량과 잡음을 고려했을 때, 저선량 CT는 폐기종 진단에 표준 진단 방법 인 고해상도 CT를 대신하여 사용할 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Takahashi M, Fukuoka J, Nitta N, et al: Imaging of pulmonary emphysema: a pictorial review, Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis, 3(2), 193-204, 2008 https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S2639
  2. MMller NL, Staples CA, Miller RR, Abboud RT: "Density mask". An objective method to quantitate emphysema using computed tomography, Chest, 94(4), 782-787, 1988 https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.94.4.782
  3. Kuwano K, Matsuba K, Ikeda T, et al: The diagnosis of mild emphysema. Correlation of computed tomography and pathology scores, Am Rev Respir Dis, 141(1), 169-178, 1990 https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/141.1.169
  4. Bankier AA, De Maertelaer V, Keyzer C, Gevenois PA: Pulmonary emphysema: subjective visual grading versus objective quantification with macroscopic morphometry and thin-section CT densitometry, Radiology, 211(3), 851-858, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.211.3.r99jn05851
  5. Kusaka Y, Hering KG, Parker JE, eds: International Classification of HRCT for Occupational and Environmental Respiratory Diseases, Tokyo, Springer-Verlag, 2005
  6. Suganuma N, Kusaka Y, Hering KG, et al: Reliability of the proposed international classification of high-resolution computed tomography for occupational and environmental respiratory diseases, J Occup Health, 51(3), 210-222, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1539/joh.L8030
  7. Blum T, Kollmeier J, Ott S, Serke M, SchMnfeld N, Bauer T: Computed tomography for diagnosis and grading of dust-induced occupational lung disease, Curr Opin Pulm Med, 14(2), 135-140, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1097/MCP.0b013e3282f5248e
  8. Majurin ML, Varpula M, Kurki T, Pakkala L: High-resolution CT of the lung in asbestos-exposed subjects. Comparison of low-dose and high-dose HRCT, Acta Radiol, 35(5), 473-477, 1994 https://doi.org/10.1177/028418519403500516
  9. Huda W: Radiation doses and risks in chest computed tomography examinations, Proc Am Thorac Soc, 4(4), 316-320, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1513/pats.200611-172HT
  10. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, et al: Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer, Arch Intern Med, 169(22), 2078-2086, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2009.427
  11. Rumack CM: 2010 ACR presidential address, patient-focused radiology: Taking charge of radiation dose, J Am Coll Radiol, 7(11), 837-844, 2010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2010.07.003
  12. Naidich DP, Marshall CH, Gribbin C, Arams RS, McCauley DI: Low-dose CT of the lungs: preliminary observations, Radiology, 175(3), 729-731, 1990 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.175.3.2343122
  13. Takahashi M, Maguire WM, Ashtari M, et al: Low-Dose Spiral Computed Tomography of the Thorax Comparison with the Standard-Dose Technique, Invest Radiol, 33(2), 68-73, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004424-199802000-00002
  14. Fasola G, Belvedere O, Aita M, et al: Low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer and pleural mesothelioma in an asbestos-exposed population: baseline results of a prospective, nonrandomized feasibility trial--an Alpe-adria Thoracic Oncology Multidisciplinary Group Study (ATOM 002), Oncologist, 12(10), 1215-1224, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.12-10-1215
  15. Won-Jeong Lee, Jong-Ryul Seon, Bong-Seon Ahn, Young-Sun Park. Findings on Chest Low-Dose CT images of Group Exposed to Inorganic Dusts. Journal of Korean Society of Radiological Technology, 34(4), 305-314, 2011
  16. Gierada DS, Pilgram TK, Whiting BR, et al: Comparison of standard- and low-radiation-dose CT for quantification of emphysema, AJR Am J Roentgenol, 188(1), 42-47, 2007 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.1498
  17. Nishio M, Matsumoto S, Ohno Y, et al: Emphysema quantification by low-dose CT: potential impact of adaptive iterative dose reduction using 3D processing, AJR Am J Roentgenol, 199(3), 595-601, 2012 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.8174
  18. Sverzellati N, Cademartiri F, Bravi F, et al: Relationship and prognostic value of modified coronary artery calcium score, FEV1, and emphysema in lung cancer screening population: the MILD trial, Radiology, 262(2), 460-467, 2012 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11110364
  19. Goldman LW: Principles of CT: radiation dose and image quality, J Nucl Med Technol, 35(4), 213-225, 2007 https://doi.org/10.2967/jnmt.106.037846
  20. Horiuchi N, Fujita J, Suemitsu I, Yamasaki Y, Higa F, Tateyama M: Low-dose multislice CT and high-resolution CT assessment of pulmonary emphysema in public school teachers, Lung, 185(1), 25-30, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00408-006-0082-4
  21. Gevenois PA, Zanen J, de Maertelaer V, De Vuyst P, Dumortier P, Yernault JC: Macroscopic assessment of pulmonary emphysema by image analysis, J Clin Pathol, 48(4), 318-322, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.48.4.318