European radiology · 2016
Software performance in segmenting ground-glass and solid components of subsolid nodules in pulmonary adenocarcinomas.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cohen Julien G, Goo Jin Mo, Yoo Roh-Eul, Park Chang Min, Lee Chang Hyun, van Ginneken Bram, Chung Doo Hyun, Kim Young Tae
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of software in segmenting ground-glass and solid components of subsolid nodules in pulmonary adenocarcinomas.
METHOD: Seventy-three pulmonary adenocarcinomas manifesting as subsolid nodules were included. Two radiologists measured the maximal axial diameter of the ground-glass components on lung windows and that of the solid components on lung and mediastinal windows. Nodules were segmented using software by applying five (-850 HU to -650 HU) and nine (-130 HU to -500 HU) attenuation thresholds. We compared the manual and software measurements of ground-glass and solid components with pathology measurements of tumour and invasive components.
RESULTS: Segmentation of ground-glass components at a threshold of -750 HU yielded mean differences of +0.06 mm (p = 0.83, 95 % limits of agreement, 4.51 to 4.67) and -2.32 mm (p < 0.001, -8.27 to 3.63) when compared with pathology and manual measurements, respectively. For solid components, mean differences between the software (at -350 HU) and pathology measurements and between the manual (lung and mediastinal windows) and pathology measurements were -0.12 mm (p = 0.74, -5.73 to 5.55]), 0.15 mm (p = 0.73, -6.92 to 7.22), and -1.14 mm (p < 0.001, -7.93 to 5.64), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Software segmentation of ground-glass and solid components in subsolid nodules showed no significant difference with pathology.
KEY POINTS: • Software can effectively segment ground-glass and solid components in subsolid nodules. • Software measurements show no significant difference with pathology measurements. • Manual measurements are more accurate on lung windows than on mediastinal windows.
METHOD: Seventy-three pulmonary adenocarcinomas manifesting as subsolid nodules were included. Two radiologists measured the maximal axial diameter of the ground-glass components on lung windows and that of the solid components on lung and mediastinal windows. Nodules were segmented using software by applying five (-850 HU to -650 HU) and nine (-130 HU to -500 HU) attenuation thresholds. We compared the manual and software measurements of ground-glass and solid components with pathology measurements of tumour and invasive components.
RESULTS: Segmentation of ground-glass components at a threshold of -750 HU yielded mean differences of +0.06 mm (p = 0.83, 95 % limits of agreement, 4.51 to 4.67) and -2.32 mm (p < 0.001, -8.27 to 3.63) when compared with pathology and manual measurements, respectively. For solid components, mean differences between the software (at -350 HU) and pathology measurements and between the manual (lung and mediastinal windows) and pathology measurements were -0.12 mm (p = 0.74, -5.73 to 5.55]), 0.15 mm (p = 0.73, -6.92 to 7.22), and -1.14 mm (p < 0.001, -7.93 to 5.64), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Software segmentation of ground-glass and solid components in subsolid nodules showed no significant difference with pathology.
KEY POINTS: • Software can effectively segment ground-glass and solid components in subsolid nodules. • Software measurements show no significant difference with pathology measurements. • Manual measurements are more accurate on lung windows than on mediastinal windows.