11 research outputs found

    Why a series on imaging in the ERJ?

    No full text

    Pulmonary functional imaging (PFI): A historical review and perspective.

    No full text
    PFI Pulmonary Functional Imaging (PFI) refers to visualization and measurement of ventilation, perfusion, gas flow and exchange as well as biomechanics. In this review, we will highlight the historical development of PFI, describing recent advances and listing the various techniques for PFI offered per modality. Challenges PFI is facing and requirements for PFI from a clinical point of view will be pointed out. Hereby the review is meant as an introduction to PFI

    Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and the Lung

    No full text

    Differentiating between Subsolid and Solid Pulmonary Nodules at CT: Inter- and Intraobserver Agreement between Experienced Thoracic Radiologists

    No full text
    Purpose To quantify the reproducibility and accuracy of experienced thoracic radiologists in differentiating between subsolid and solid pulmonary nodules at CT. Materials and Methods The institutional review board of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center approved this multicenter study. Six thoracic radiologists, with a mean of 21 years of experience in thoracic radiology (range, 17-22 years), selected images of 10 solid and 10 subsolid nodules to create a database of 120 nodules; this selection served as the reference standard. Each radiologist then interpreted 120 randomly ordered nodules in two different sessions that were separated by a minimum of 3 weeks. The radiologists classified whether or not each nodule was subsolid. Inter- and intraobserver agreement was assessed with a κ statistic. The number of correct classifications was calculated and correlated with nodule size by using Bland-Altman plots. The relationship between disagreement and nodule morphologic characteristics was analyzed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results Interobserver agreement (κ) was 0.619 (range, 0.469-0.745; 95\% confidence interval (CI): 0.576, 0.663) and 0.670 (range, 0.440-0.839; 95\% CI: 0.608, 0.733) for interpretation sessions 1 and 2, respectively. Intraobserver agreement (κ) was 0.792 (95\% CI: 0.750, 0.833). Averaged for interpretation sessions, correct classification was achieved by all radiologists for 58\% (70 of 120) of nodules. Radiologists agreed with their initial determination (the reference standard) in 77\% of cases (range, 45\%-100\%). Nodule size weakly correlated with correct classification (long axis: Spearman rank correlation coefficient, rs = 0.161 and P = .049; short axis: rs = 0.128 and P = .163). Conclusion The reproducibility and accuracy of thoracic radiologists in classifying whether or not a nodule is subsolid varied in the retrospective study. This inconsistency may affect surveillance recommendations and prognostic determinations. (©) RSNA, 2015 Online supplemental material is available for this article

    Recommendations for the management of subsolid pulmonary nodules detected at CT: a statement from the Fleischner Society

    No full text
    Item does not contain fulltextThis report is to complement the original Fleischner Society recommendations for incidentally detected solid nodules by proposing a set of recommendations specifically aimed at subsolid nodules. The development of a standardized approach to the interpretation and management of subsolid nodules remains critically important given that peripheral adenocarcinomas represent the most common type of lung cancer, with evidence of increasing frequency. Following an initial consideration of appropriate terminology to describe subsolid nodules and a brief review of the new classification system for peripheral lung adenocarcinomas sponsored by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC), American Thoracic Society (ATS), and European Respiratory Society (ERS), six specific recommendations were made, three with regard to solitary subsolid nodules and three with regard to multiple subsolid nodules. Each recommendation is followed first by the rationales underlying the recommendation and then by specific pertinent remarks. Finally, issues for which future research is needed are discussed. The recommendations are the result of careful review of the literature now available regarding subsolid nodules. Given the complexity of these lesions, the current recommendations are more varied than the original Fleischner Society guidelines for solid nodules. It cannot be overemphasized that these guidelines must be interpreted in light of an individual's clinical history. Given the frequency with which subsolid nodules are encountered in daily clinical practice, and notwithstanding continuing controversy on many of these issues, it is anticipated that further refinements and modifications to these recommendations will be forthcoming as information continues to emerge from ongoing research

    Guidelines for Management of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules Detected on CT Images: From the Fleischner Society 2017

    No full text
    Item does not contain fulltextThe Fleischner Society Guidelines for management of solid nodules were published in 2005, and separate guidelines for subsolid nodules were issued in 2013. Since then, new information has become available; therefore, the guidelines have been revised to reflect current thinking on nodule management. The revised guidelines incorporate several substantive changes that reflect current thinking on the management of small nodules. The minimum threshold size for routine follow-up has been increased, and recommended follow-up intervals are now given as a range rather than as a precise time period to give radiologists, clinicians, and patients greater discretion to accommodate individual risk factors and preferences. The guidelines for solid and subsolid nodules have been combined in one simplified table, and specific recommendations have been included for multiple nodules. These guidelines represent the consensus of the Fleischner Society, and as such, they incorporate the opinions of a multidisciplinary international group of thoracic radiologists, pulmonologists, surgeons, pathologists, and other specialists. Changes from the previous guidelines issued by the Fleischner Society are based on new data and accumulated experience. (c) RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article. An earlier incorrect version of this article appeared online. This article was corrected on March 13, 2017
    corecore