Cargando…

Diameter of the Solid Component in Subsolid Nodules on Low-Dose Unenhanced Chest Computed Tomography: Measurement Accuracy for the Prediction of Invasive Component in Lung Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE: To determine if measurement of the diameter of the solid component in subsolid nodules (SSNs) on low-dose unenhanced chest computed tomography (CT) is as accurate as on standard-dose enhanced CT in prediction of pathological size of invasive component of lung adenocarcinoma. MATERIALS AND...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ahn, Hyungwoo, Lee, Kyung Hee, Kim, Jihang, Kim, Jeongjae, Kim, Junghoon, Lee, Kyung Won
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Radiology 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5904478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29713229
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.19.3.508
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To determine if measurement of the diameter of the solid component in subsolid nodules (SSNs) on low-dose unenhanced chest computed tomography (CT) is as accurate as on standard-dose enhanced CT in prediction of pathological size of invasive component of lung adenocarcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From February 2012 to October 2015, 114 SSNs were identified in 105 patients that underwent low-dose unenhanced and standard-dose enhanced CT pre-operatively. Three radiologists independently measured the largest diameter of the solid component. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to assess inter-reader agreement. We estimated measurement differences between the size of solid component and that of invasive component. We measured diagnostic accuracy of the prediction of invasive adenocarcinoma using a size criterion of a solid component ≥ 6 mm, and compared them using a generalized linear mixed model. RESULTS: Inter-reader agreement was excellent (ICC, 0.84.0.89). The mean ± standard deviation of absolute measurement differences between the solid component and invasive component was 4 ± 4 mm in low-dose unenhanced CT and 5 ± 4 mm in standard-dose enhanced CT. Diagnostic accuracy was 81.3% (95% confidence interval, 76.7.85.3%) in low-dose unenhanced CT and 76.6% (71.8.81.0%) in standard-dose enhanced CT, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.130). CONCLUSION: Measurement of the diameter of the solid component of SSNs on low-dose unenhanced chest CT was as accurate as on standard-dose enhanced CT for predicting the invasive component. Thus, low-dose unenhanced CT may be used safely in the evaluation of patients with SSNs.