Flat panel detector-based volumetric CT - Prototype evaluation with volumetry of small artificial nodules in a pulmonary phantom
Flat panel detector-based volumetric CT - Prototype evaluation with volumetry of small artificial nodules in a pulmonary phantom
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/01.rti.0000131591.12777.a8
复制
发表时间：
2004-07-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Engelke, C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marten, K;Funke, M;Engelke, C
目的：评估基于无定形硅树脂的平板探测器体积CT（VCT）对肺部体模中小结节的体积评估，并与4排多层螺旋CT（MSCT）进行比较实验。材料和方法：70个合成结节（体积范围（VR）：0.99-185.77 mm（3）;估计直径范围（艾德）：1.4-7.8 mm），采用0.63 mm（MSCT I）和1.25 mm（MSCT II）准直进行VCT和MSCT等体积变形后的球形扫描。比较结节变形前后3种CT模式的测量体积和测量误差百分比（PME）。对于变形前后的每个测量对，测定变形后相对体积不准确度（RIA）。结果：仅VCT扫描可计算出最小结节的体积（VR = 0.99-2.83 mm（3），艾德= 1.4-1.9 mm）。在VCT中，变形前后测量的体积和PME与MSCT相比差异显著较小（VCT：P = 0.06和0.56; MSCT I：P = 0.0012和0.006; MSCT II：P < 0.0001）。在VCT PME中，5.51-32.21 mm（3）结节变形前后的ED（艾德= 2.4-4.1 mm）明显低于MSCT球形结节和变形结节VCT平均值分别为1.43-1.91%和1.98- 3.48%，MSCT I平均值分别为9.97-26.1%和12.16- 38.10%; MSCT II平均值分别为17.79-46.18和18.14- 54.66%，P < 0.0001），VCT的RIA显著低于MSCT（VCT：0.50- 2.62%，MSCT I：3.35- 15.97%，MSCT II：4.29-18.46%，P = 0.0001-0.0039）。结论：VCT容积法对1.4- 4.1mm的微小结节具有较高的准确性。
Purpose: To evaluate amorphous silicone-based flat panel detector volumetric CT (VCT) in volumetric assessment of small nodules in a pulmonary phantom, and to perform comparative experiments with 4-row multislice CT (MSCT).Materials and Methods: Seventy synthetic nodules (volume range (VR): 0.99-185.77 mm(3); estimated diameter range (ED): 1.4-7.8 mm) were scanned in spherical shape and after iso-volumetric deformation with VCT and MSCT using 0.63 mm (MSCT I) and 1.25 mm (MSCT II) collimations. Measured volumes and percent measurement errors (PME) were compared between the 3 CT modes before and after nodule deformation. For each measurement pair before and after deformation, the post-deformation relative volumetric inaccuracy (RIA) was determined. Volume, PME, and RIA differences were tested using Wilcoxon and Friedman methods.Results: The volumes of the smallest nodules (VR = 0.99-2.83 mm(3), ED = 1.4-1.9 mm) were computable only from VCT scans. In VCT, measured volumes and PMEs before and after deformation differed significantly less compared with MSCT (VCT: P = 0.06 and 0.56, respectively; MSCT I: P = 0.0012 and 0.006, respectively; and MSCT II: P < 0.0001 for measured volumes and PMEs). In VCT PMEs of 5.51-32.21 mm(3) nodules (ED = 2.4-4.1 mm) before and after deformation were significantly below MSCT (VCT averages = 1.43-1.91% and 1.98-3.48%, for spherical and deformed nodules, respectively; MSCT I averages = 9.97-26.1% and 12.16-38.10%, respectively; MSCT II averages = 17.79-46.18 and 18.14-54.66%, respectively, P < 0.0001) and RIAs in VCT were significantly below MSCT (VCT: 0.50-2.62%, MSCT I: 3.35-15.97%, and MSCT II: 4.29-18.46%; P = 0.0001-0.0039).Conclusion: VCT volumetry is highly accurate in volumetry of smallest nodules with estimated diameters of 1.4-4.1 mm.