Cargando…
Evaluation of the ΔV 4D CT ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon CT ventilation data and comparison to other methods
Ventilation distribution calculation using 4D CT has shown promising potential in several clinical applications. This study evaluated the direct geometric ventilation calculation method, namely the ΔV method, with xenon‐enhanced CT (XeCT) ventilation data from four sheep, and compared it with two ot...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5874808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27074479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i2.5985 |
_version_ | 1783310235573682176 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Geoffrey G. Latifi, Kujtim Du, Kaifang Reinhardt, Joseph M. Christensen, Gary E. Ding, Kai Feygelman, Vladimir Moros, Eduardo G. |
author_facet | Zhang, Geoffrey G. Latifi, Kujtim Du, Kaifang Reinhardt, Joseph M. Christensen, Gary E. Ding, Kai Feygelman, Vladimir Moros, Eduardo G. |
author_sort | Zhang, Geoffrey G. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Ventilation distribution calculation using 4D CT has shown promising potential in several clinical applications. This study evaluated the direct geometric ventilation calculation method, namely the ΔV method, with xenon‐enhanced CT (XeCT) ventilation data from four sheep, and compared it with two other published methods, the Jacobian and the Hounsfield unit (HU) methods. Spearman correlation coefficient (SCC) and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) were used for the evaluation and comparison. The average SCC with one standard deviation was [Formula: see text] with a range between 0.29 and 0.61 between the XeCT and DLV ventilation distributions. The average DSC value for lower 30% ventilation volumes between the XeCT and ΔV ventilation distributions was [Formula: see text] with a range between 0.48 and 0.63. Ventilation difference introduced by deformable image registration errors improved with smoothing. In conclusion, ventilation distributions generated using ΔV‐4D CT and deformable image registration are in reasonably agreement with the in vivo XeCT measured ventilation distribution. PACS number(s): 87.57.N‐, 87.57.nj, 87.57.Q‐, 87.85.Pq |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5874808 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58748082018-04-02 Evaluation of the ΔV 4D CT ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon CT ventilation data and comparison to other methods Zhang, Geoffrey G. Latifi, Kujtim Du, Kaifang Reinhardt, Joseph M. Christensen, Gary E. Ding, Kai Feygelman, Vladimir Moros, Eduardo G. J Appl Clin Med Phys Medical Imaging Ventilation distribution calculation using 4D CT has shown promising potential in several clinical applications. This study evaluated the direct geometric ventilation calculation method, namely the ΔV method, with xenon‐enhanced CT (XeCT) ventilation data from four sheep, and compared it with two other published methods, the Jacobian and the Hounsfield unit (HU) methods. Spearman correlation coefficient (SCC) and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) were used for the evaluation and comparison. The average SCC with one standard deviation was [Formula: see text] with a range between 0.29 and 0.61 between the XeCT and DLV ventilation distributions. The average DSC value for lower 30% ventilation volumes between the XeCT and ΔV ventilation distributions was [Formula: see text] with a range between 0.48 and 0.63. Ventilation difference introduced by deformable image registration errors improved with smoothing. In conclusion, ventilation distributions generated using ΔV‐4D CT and deformable image registration are in reasonably agreement with the in vivo XeCT measured ventilation distribution. PACS number(s): 87.57.N‐, 87.57.nj, 87.57.Q‐, 87.85.Pq John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5874808/ /pubmed/27074479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i2.5985 Text en © 2016 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Medical Imaging Zhang, Geoffrey G. Latifi, Kujtim Du, Kaifang Reinhardt, Joseph M. Christensen, Gary E. Ding, Kai Feygelman, Vladimir Moros, Eduardo G. Evaluation of the ΔV 4D CT ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon CT ventilation data and comparison to other methods |
title | Evaluation of the ΔV 4D CT ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon CT ventilation data and comparison to other methods |
title_full | Evaluation of the ΔV 4D CT ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon CT ventilation data and comparison to other methods |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of the ΔV 4D CT ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon CT ventilation data and comparison to other methods |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of the ΔV 4D CT ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon CT ventilation data and comparison to other methods |
title_short | Evaluation of the ΔV 4D CT ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon CT ventilation data and comparison to other methods |
title_sort | evaluation of the δv 4d ct ventilation calculation method using in vivo xenon ct ventilation data and comparison to other methods |
topic | Medical Imaging |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5874808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27074479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i2.5985 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhanggeoffreyg evaluationofthedv4dctventilationcalculationmethodusinginvivoxenonctventilationdataandcomparisontoothermethods AT latifikujtim evaluationofthedv4dctventilationcalculationmethodusinginvivoxenonctventilationdataandcomparisontoothermethods AT dukaifang evaluationofthedv4dctventilationcalculationmethodusinginvivoxenonctventilationdataandcomparisontoothermethods AT reinhardtjosephm evaluationofthedv4dctventilationcalculationmethodusinginvivoxenonctventilationdataandcomparisontoothermethods AT christensengarye evaluationofthedv4dctventilationcalculationmethodusinginvivoxenonctventilationdataandcomparisontoothermethods AT dingkai evaluationofthedv4dctventilationcalculationmethodusinginvivoxenonctventilationdataandcomparisontoothermethods AT feygelmanvladimir evaluationofthedv4dctventilationcalculationmethodusinginvivoxenonctventilationdataandcomparisontoothermethods AT moroseduardog evaluationofthedv4dctventilationcalculationmethodusinginvivoxenonctventilationdataandcomparisontoothermethods |