PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 1, 2014Translational Oncology138 citationsOpen Access

Exploring Variability in CT Characterization of Tumors: A Preliminary Phantom Study

View Full Paper
BZBinsheng ZhaoYTYongqiang TanWTWei Yann Tsai

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

PURPOSE: To explore the effects of computed tomography (CT) slice thickness and reconstruction algorithm on quantification of image features to characterize tumors using a chest phantom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-two phantom lesions of known sizes (10 and 20 mm), shapes (spherical, elliptical, lobulated, and spiculated), and densities -630, -10, and +100 Hounsfield Unit (HU) were inserted into an anthropomorphic thorax phantom and scanned three times with relocations. The raw data were reconstructed using six imaging settings, i.e., a combination of three slice thicknesses of 1.25, 2.5, and 5 mm and two reconstruction kernels of lung and standard. Lesions were segmented and 14 image features representing lesion size, shape, and texture were calculated. Differences in the measured image features due to slice thickness and reconstruction algorithm were compared using linear regression method by adjusting three confounding variables (size, density, and shape). RESULTS: All 14 features were significantly different between 1.25 and 5 mm slice images. The 1.25 and 2.5 mm slice thicknesses were better than 5 mm for volume, density mean, density SD gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) energy and homogeneity. As for the reconstruction algorithm, there was no significant difference in uni-dimension, volume, shape index 9, and compactness. Lung reconstruction was better for density mean, whereas standard reconstruction was better for density SD. CONCLUSIONS: CT slice thickness and reconstruction algorithm can significantly affect the quantification of image features. Thinner (1.25 and 2.5 mm) and thicker (5 mm) slice images should not be used interchangeably. Sharper and smoother reconstructions significantly affect the density-based features.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zhao et al. (2014) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a2247d21b095894fc4ee903https://doi.org/10.1593/tlo.13865
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1A resource for the assessment of lung nodule size estimation methods: database of thoracic CT scans of an anthropomorphic phantom2010 · 78 citations
  2. 2Characterizing the lacunarity of random and deterministic fractal sets1991 · 634 citations
  3. 3Classification of brain tumor type and grade using MRI texture and shape in a machine learning scheme2009 · 857 citations
  4. 4Tumor Heterogeneity and Permeability as Measured on the CT Component of PET/CT Predict Survival in Patients with Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer2013 · 207 citations
  5. 5Texture analysis of medical images2004 · 1,048 citations