The British journal of radiology · 2026
CT low attenuation area quantification versus visual scoring for early pulmonary emphysema detection in lung cancer screening.
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.
Liu Hailan, Han Daiwei, Heuvelmans Marjolein A, Silva Mario, Gratama Jan Willem C, Mao Yifei, van der Aalst Carlijn, Yi Jaeyoun, Ye Zhaoxiang, de Koning Harry J, Oudkerk Matthijs
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare low-attenuation analysis (LAA) with visual scoring and explore their application in the detection of emphysema in low-dose CT (LDCT) scans.
METHODS: A random cohort of 352 CT examinations from health-check participants was selected from a lung cancer screening(LCS) dataset. Scans were evaluated for emphysema by four readers according to latest Fleischner criteria, and emphysema was quantified by LAA with thresholds from -900 HU to -980 HU. Fleiss' Kappa assessed inter-reader agreement on visual detection and severity classification. Cases with full agreement on emphysema presence were used to compare LAA quantification and visual detection. Spearman correlation test measured their correlation and Cohen's Kappa evaluated the agreement between LAA%-measured emphysema and visual detection.
RESULTS: Agreement among four observers was found in 266 cases on emphysema presence based on visual evaluation (K = 0.738, 0.737-0.739). Concordance between emphysema presence using a LAA% cutoff of 6% and binary visual classification was 61.3% (163/266, Cohen's Kappa:0.173. Spearman analysis showed a correlation between LAA% and visual scores (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: LAA emphysema quantification shows in comparison with visual scoring limited performance for discrimination of normal and emphysematous lung parenchyma in a Low dose CT Lung cancer screening dataset.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Full agreement among four readers regarding visual emphysema classification was achieved in only three-quarters of cases. Limited concordance was found between LAA%-measured emphysema and visual detection.
METHODS: A random cohort of 352 CT examinations from health-check participants was selected from a lung cancer screening(LCS) dataset. Scans were evaluated for emphysema by four readers according to latest Fleischner criteria, and emphysema was quantified by LAA with thresholds from -900 HU to -980 HU. Fleiss' Kappa assessed inter-reader agreement on visual detection and severity classification. Cases with full agreement on emphysema presence were used to compare LAA quantification and visual detection. Spearman correlation test measured their correlation and Cohen's Kappa evaluated the agreement between LAA%-measured emphysema and visual detection.
RESULTS: Agreement among four observers was found in 266 cases on emphysema presence based on visual evaluation (K = 0.738, 0.737-0.739). Concordance between emphysema presence using a LAA% cutoff of 6% and binary visual classification was 61.3% (163/266, Cohen's Kappa:0.173. Spearman analysis showed a correlation between LAA% and visual scores (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: LAA emphysema quantification shows in comparison with visual scoring limited performance for discrimination of normal and emphysematous lung parenchyma in a Low dose CT Lung cancer screening dataset.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Full agreement among four readers regarding visual emphysema classification was achieved in only three-quarters of cases. Limited concordance was found between LAA%-measured emphysema and visual detection.