Cargando…
Effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the added value of the soft tissue image obtained by the one-shot dual-energy subtraction (DES) method using a flat-panel detector compared with the standard image alone in distinguishing calcified from non-calcified nodules on chest radiographs. We evaluate...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10260954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37308582 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36785-y |
_version_ | 1785057869979189248 |
---|---|
author | Minato, Kojiro Yamazaki, Motohiko Yagi, Takuya Hirata, Tetsuhiro Tominaga, Masaki You, Kyoryoku Ishikawa, Hiroyuki |
author_facet | Minato, Kojiro Yamazaki, Motohiko Yagi, Takuya Hirata, Tetsuhiro Tominaga, Masaki You, Kyoryoku Ishikawa, Hiroyuki |
author_sort | Minato, Kojiro |
collection | PubMed |
description | The purpose of this study was to evaluate the added value of the soft tissue image obtained by the one-shot dual-energy subtraction (DES) method using a flat-panel detector compared with the standard image alone in distinguishing calcified from non-calcified nodules on chest radiographs. We evaluated 155 nodules (48 calcified and 107 non-calcified) in 139 patients. Five radiologists (readers 1 − 5) with 26, 14, 8, 6 and 3 years of experience, respectively, evaluated whether the nodules were calcified using chest radiography. CT was used as the gold standard of calcification and non-calcification. Accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were compared between analyses with and without soft tissue images. The misdiagnosis ratio (false positive plus false negative ratios) when nodules and bones overlapped was also examined. The accuracy of all radiologists increased after adding soft tissue images (readers 1 − 5: 89.7% vs. 92.3% [P = 0.206], 83.2% vs. 87.7% [P = 0.178], 79.4% vs. 92.3% [P < 0.001], 77.4% vs. 87.1% [P = 0.007], and 63.2% vs. 83.2% [P < 0.001], respectively). AUCs for all the readers improved, except for reader 2 (readers 1 − 5: 0.927 vs. 0.937 [P = 0.495], 0.853 vs. 0.834 [P = 0.624], 0.825 vs. 0.878 [P = 0.151], 0.808 vs. 0.896 [P < 0.001], and 0.694 vs. 0.846 [P < 0.001], respectively). The misdiagnosis ratio for nodules that overlapped with the bone decreased after adding soft tissue images in all readers (11.5% vs. 7.6% [P = 0.096], 17.6% vs. 12.2% [P = 0.144], 21.4% vs. 7.6% [P < 0.001], 22.1% vs. 14.5% [P = 0.050] and 35.9% vs. 16.0% [P < 0.001], respectively), particularly that of readers 3 − 5. In conclusion, the soft tissue images obtained using one-shot DES with a flat-panel detector have added value in distinguishing calcified from non-calcified nodules on chest radiographs, especially for less experienced radiologists. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10260954 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102609542023-06-15 Effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules Minato, Kojiro Yamazaki, Motohiko Yagi, Takuya Hirata, Tetsuhiro Tominaga, Masaki You, Kyoryoku Ishikawa, Hiroyuki Sci Rep Article The purpose of this study was to evaluate the added value of the soft tissue image obtained by the one-shot dual-energy subtraction (DES) method using a flat-panel detector compared with the standard image alone in distinguishing calcified from non-calcified nodules on chest radiographs. We evaluated 155 nodules (48 calcified and 107 non-calcified) in 139 patients. Five radiologists (readers 1 − 5) with 26, 14, 8, 6 and 3 years of experience, respectively, evaluated whether the nodules were calcified using chest radiography. CT was used as the gold standard of calcification and non-calcification. Accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were compared between analyses with and without soft tissue images. The misdiagnosis ratio (false positive plus false negative ratios) when nodules and bones overlapped was also examined. The accuracy of all radiologists increased after adding soft tissue images (readers 1 − 5: 89.7% vs. 92.3% [P = 0.206], 83.2% vs. 87.7% [P = 0.178], 79.4% vs. 92.3% [P < 0.001], 77.4% vs. 87.1% [P = 0.007], and 63.2% vs. 83.2% [P < 0.001], respectively). AUCs for all the readers improved, except for reader 2 (readers 1 − 5: 0.927 vs. 0.937 [P = 0.495], 0.853 vs. 0.834 [P = 0.624], 0.825 vs. 0.878 [P = 0.151], 0.808 vs. 0.896 [P < 0.001], and 0.694 vs. 0.846 [P < 0.001], respectively). The misdiagnosis ratio for nodules that overlapped with the bone decreased after adding soft tissue images in all readers (11.5% vs. 7.6% [P = 0.096], 17.6% vs. 12.2% [P = 0.144], 21.4% vs. 7.6% [P < 0.001], 22.1% vs. 14.5% [P = 0.050] and 35.9% vs. 16.0% [P < 0.001], respectively), particularly that of readers 3 − 5. In conclusion, the soft tissue images obtained using one-shot DES with a flat-panel detector have added value in distinguishing calcified from non-calcified nodules on chest radiographs, especially for less experienced radiologists. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-06-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10260954/ /pubmed/37308582 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36785-y Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Minato, Kojiro Yamazaki, Motohiko Yagi, Takuya Hirata, Tetsuhiro Tominaga, Masaki You, Kyoryoku Ishikawa, Hiroyuki Effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules |
title | Effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules |
title_full | Effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules |
title_fullStr | Effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules |
title_full_unstemmed | Effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules |
title_short | Effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules |
title_sort | effectiveness of one-shot dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with flat-panel detector in distinguishing between calcified and non-calcified nodules |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10260954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37308582 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36785-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT minatokojiro effectivenessofoneshotdualenergysubtractionchestradiographywithflatpaneldetectorindistinguishingbetweencalcifiedandnoncalcifiednodules AT yamazakimotohiko effectivenessofoneshotdualenergysubtractionchestradiographywithflatpaneldetectorindistinguishingbetweencalcifiedandnoncalcifiednodules AT yagitakuya effectivenessofoneshotdualenergysubtractionchestradiographywithflatpaneldetectorindistinguishingbetweencalcifiedandnoncalcifiednodules AT hiratatetsuhiro effectivenessofoneshotdualenergysubtractionchestradiographywithflatpaneldetectorindistinguishingbetweencalcifiedandnoncalcifiednodules AT tominagamasaki effectivenessofoneshotdualenergysubtractionchestradiographywithflatpaneldetectorindistinguishingbetweencalcifiedandnoncalcifiednodules AT youkyoryoku effectivenessofoneshotdualenergysubtractionchestradiographywithflatpaneldetectorindistinguishingbetweencalcifiedandnoncalcifiednodules AT ishikawahiroyuki effectivenessofoneshotdualenergysubtractionchestradiographywithflatpaneldetectorindistinguishingbetweencalcifiedandnoncalcifiednodules |