Evaluation of 1D, 2D and 3D nodule size estimation by radiologists for spherical and non-spherical nodules through CT thoracic phantom imaging

Nicholas Petrick; Hyun J. Grace Kim; David Clunie; Kristin Borradaile; Robert Ford; Rongping Zeng; Marios A. Gavrielides; Michael F. McNitt-Gray; Charles Fenimore; Z. Q. John Lu; Binsheng Zhao; Andrew J. Buckler

doi:10.1117/12.878265

4 March 2011 Evaluation of 1D, 2D and 3D nodule size estimation by radiologists for spherical and non-spherical nodules through CT thoracic phantom imaging

Nicholas Petrick, Hyun J. Grace Kim, David Clunie, Kristin Borradaile, Robert Ford, Rongping Zeng, Marios A. Gavrielides, Michael F. McNitt-Gray, Charles Fenimore, Z. Q. John Lu, Binsheng Zhao, Andrew J. Buckler

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 7963, Medical Imaging 2011: Computer-Aided Diagnosis; 79630D (2011) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.878265
Event: SPIE Medical Imaging, 2011, Lake Buena Vista (Orlando), Florida, United States

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to estimate bias in measuring the size of spherical and non-spherical lesions by radiologists using three sizing techniques under a variety of simulated lesion and reconstruction slice thickness conditions. We designed a reader study in which six radiologists estimated the size of 10 synthetic nodules of various sizes, shapes and densities embedded within a realistic anthropomorphic thorax phantom from CT scan data. In this manuscript we report preliminary results for the first four readers (Reader 1-4). Two repeat CT scans of the phantom containing each nodule were acquired using a Philips 16-slice scanner at a 0.8 and 5 mm slice thickness. The readers measured the sizes of all nodules for each of the 40 resulting scans (10 nodules x 2 slice thickness x 2 repeat scans) using three sizing techniques (1D longest in-slice dimension; 2D area from longest in-slice dimension and corresponding longest perpendicular dimension; 3D semi-automated volume) in each of 2 reading sessions. The normalized size was estimated for each sizing method and an inter-comparison of bias among methods was performed. The overall relative biases (standard deviation) of the 1D, 2D and 3D methods for the four readers subset (Readers 1-4) were -13.4 (20.3), -15.3 (28.4) and 4.8 (21.2) percentage points, respectively. The relative biases for the 3D volume sizing method was statistically lower than either the 1D or 2D method (p<0.001 for 1D vs. 3D and 2D vs. 3D).

Citation Download Citation

Nicholas Petrick, Hyun J. Grace Kim, David Clunie, Kristin Borradaile, Robert Ford, Rongping Zeng, Marios A. Gavrielides, Michael F. McNitt-Gray, Charles Fenimore, Z. Q. John Lu, Binsheng Zhao, and Andrew J. Buckler "Evaluation of 1D, 2D and 3D nodule size estimation by radiologists for spherical and non-spherical nodules through CT thoracic phantom imaging", Proc. SPIE 7963, Medical Imaging 2011: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, 79630D (4 March 2011); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.878265

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available