Lung Cancer Screening with Submillisievert Chest CT: Potential Pitfalls of Pulmonary Findings in Different Readers with Various Experience Levels

Purpose To assess the interreader variability of submillisievert CT for lung cancer screening in radiologists with various experience levels. Method Six radiologists with different degrees of clinical experience in radiology (range, 1-15 years), rated 100 submillisievert CT chest studies as either negative screening finding (no nodules, benign nodules, nodules 10 mm). Each radiologist interpreted scans randomly ordered and reading time was recorded. Interobserver agreement was assessed with ak statistic. Reasons for differences in nodule classification were analysed on a case-by-case basis. Reading time was correlated with reader experience using Pearson correlation (r). Results The overall interobserver agreement between all readers was moderate (k = 0.454; p < 0.001). In 57 patients, all radiologists agreed on the differentiation of negative and indeterminate/positive finding. In 64 cases disagreement between readers led to different nodule classification. In 8 cases some readers rated the nodule as benign, whereas others scored the case as positive. Overall, disagreement in nodule classification was mostly due to failure in identification of target lesion (n = 40), different lesion measurement (n = 44) or different classification (n = 26). Mean overall reading time per scan was of 2 min 2 s (range: 7s-7 min 45 s) and correlated with reader-experience (r =-0.824). Conclusions Our study showed substantial interobserver variability for the detection and classification of pulmonary nodules in submillisievert CT. This highlights the importance for careful standardisation of screening programs with the objective of harmonizing efforts of involved radiologists across different institutions by defining and assuring quality standards

Semi-automated volumetry of pulmonary nodules: Intra-individual comparison of standard dose and chest X-ray equivalent ultralow dose chest CT scans

PURPOSE To assess the performance of semi-automated volumetry of solid pulmonary nodules on single-energy tin-filtered ultralow dose (ULD) chest CT scans at a radiation dose equivalent to chest X-ray relative to standard dose (SD) chest CT scans and assess the impact of kernel and iterative reconstruction selection. METHODS Ninety-four consecutive patients from a prospective single-center study were included and underwent clinically indicated SD chest CT (1.9 ± 0.8 mSv) and additional ULD chest CT (0.13 ± 0.01 mSv) in the same session. All scans were reconstructed with a soft tissue (Br40) and lung (Bl64) kernel as well as with Filtered Back Projection (FBP) and Iterative Reconstruction (ADMIRE-3 and ADMIRE-5). One hundred and forty-eight solid pulmonary nodules were identified and analysed by semi-automated volumetry on all reconstructions. Nodule volumes were compared amongst all reconstructions thereby focusing on the agreement between SD and ULD scans. RESULTS Nodule volumes ranged from 58.5 (28.8-126) mm$^{3}$ for ADMIRE-5 Br40 ULD reconstructions to 72.5 (39-134) mm$^{3}$ for FBP Bl64 SD reconstructions with significant differences between reconstructions (p < 0.001). Interscan agreement of volumes between two given reconstructions ranged from ICC = 0.605 to ICC = 0.999. Between SD and ULD scans, agreement of nodule volumes was highest for FBP Br40 (ICC = 0.995), FBP Bl64 (ICC = 0.939) and ADMIRE-5 Bl64 (ICC = 0.994) reconstructions. ADMIRE-3 reconstructions exhibited reduced interscan agreement of nodule volumes (ICCs from 0.788 - 0.882). CONCLUSIONS The interscan agreement of node volumes between SD and ULD is high depending on the choice of kernel and reconstruction algorithm. However, caution should be exercised when comparing two image series that were not identically reconstructed

Emphysema quantification and lung volumetry in chest X-ray equivalent ultralow dose CT - Intra-individual comparison with standard dose CT

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether ultralow dose chest CT with tin filtration can be used for emphysema quantification and lung volumetry and to assess differences in emphysema measurements and lung volume between standard dose and ultralow dose CT scans using advanced modeled iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE). METHODS: 84 consecutive patients from a prospective, IRB-approved single-center study were included and underwent clinically indicated standard dose chest CT (1.7±0.6mSv) and additional single-energy ultralow dose CT (0.14±0.01mSv) at 100kV and fixed tube current at 70mAs with tin filtration in the same session. Forty of the 84 patients (48%) had no emphysema, 44 (52%) had emphysema. One radiologist performed fully automated software-based pulmonary emphysema quantification and lung volumetry of standard and ultralow dose CT with different levels of ADMIRE. Friedman test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were used for multiple comparison of emphysema and lung volume. Lung volumes were compared using the concordance correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The median low-attenuation areas (LAA) using filtered back projection (FBP) in standard dose was 4.4% and decreased to 2.6%, 2.1% and 1.8% using ADMIRE 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The median values of LAA in ultralow dose CT were 5.7%, 4.1% and 2.4% for ADMIRE 3, 4, and 5, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between LAA in standard dose CT using FBP and ultralow dose using ADMIRE 4 (p=0.358) as well as in standard dose CT using ADMIRE 3 and ultralow dose using ADMIRE 5 (p=0.966). In comparison with standard dose FBP the concordance correlation coefficients of lung volumetry were 1.000, 0.999, and 0.999 for ADMIRE 3, 4, and 5 in standard dose, and 0.972 for ADMIRE 3, 4 and 5 in ultralow dose CT. CONCLUSIONS: Ultralow dose CT at chest X-ray equivalent dose levels allows for lung volumetry as well as detection and quantification of emphysema. However, longitudinal emphysema analyses should be performed with the same scan protocol and reconstruction algorithms for reproducibility

Pharmacological treatment of primary chronic venous disease: Rationale, results and unanswered questions

Aim: The aim of this article was first to review the complex pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for symptoms and signs of primary chronic venous disease (CVD) that allow the identification of targets for pharmacological treatment. The results of CVD treatment with venoactive drugs (VADs) were emphasised and presented in the form of recommendations. The last section raises key questions to be answered to improve protocols for good clinical trials and to draw up future guidelines on these agents. Methods: The literature has been reviewed here using PubMed and Embase. Results: Venous hypertension appears to underlie all clinical manifestations of primary CVD. Inflammation is key in wall remodelling, valve failure and subsequent venous hypertension. Changes in the haemodynamics of veins are transmitted to the microcirculation, resulting in capillary alteration leading to oedema, skin changes and eventually venous ulceration. Venous symptoms may be the result of interplays between pro-inflammatory mediators and nerve fibres located in the venous wall. Therefore, venous inflammation constitutes a promising therapeutic target for pharmacological intervention, and some available VADs could attenuate various elements of venous inflammation. Based on recent studies, reviews and guidelines, tentative recommendations for the use of VADs were proposed and strong recommendations were given to two of them (micronised purified flavonoid fraction and oxerutins). Conclusion: VADs should be accorded a better role in the management of CVD. However, larger and more definitive clinical trials are needed to improve the existing recommendations. © 2010 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved