Cargando…

Reliability of CT‐based texture features: Phantom study

OBJECTIVE: To determine the intra‐, inter‐ and test‐retest variability of CT‐based texture analysis (CTTA) metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, we conducted a series of CT imaging experiments using a texture phantom to evaluate the performance of a CTTA panel on routine abdominal imaging p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Varghese, Bino A., Hwang, Darryl, Cen, Steven Y., Levy, Joshua, Liu, Derek, Lau, Christopher, Rivas, Marielena, Desai, Bhushan, Goodenough, David J., Duddalwar, Vinay A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6698768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31222919
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12666
_version_ 1783444611445817344
author Varghese, Bino A.
Hwang, Darryl
Cen, Steven Y.
Levy, Joshua
Liu, Derek
Lau, Christopher
Rivas, Marielena
Desai, Bhushan
Goodenough, David J.
Duddalwar, Vinay A.
author_facet Varghese, Bino A.
Hwang, Darryl
Cen, Steven Y.
Levy, Joshua
Liu, Derek
Lau, Christopher
Rivas, Marielena
Desai, Bhushan
Goodenough, David J.
Duddalwar, Vinay A.
author_sort Varghese, Bino A.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine the intra‐, inter‐ and test‐retest variability of CT‐based texture analysis (CTTA) metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, we conducted a series of CT imaging experiments using a texture phantom to evaluate the performance of a CTTA panel on routine abdominal imaging protocols. The phantom comprises of three different regions with various textures found in tumors. The phantom was scanned on two CT scanners viz. the Philips Brilliance 64 CT and Toshiba Aquilion Prime 160 CT scanners. The intra‐scanner variability of the CTTA metrics was evaluated across imaging parameters such as slice thickness, field of view, post‐reconstruction filtering, tube voltage, and tube current. For each scanner and scanning parameter combination, we evaluated the performance of eight different types of texture quantification techniques on a predetermined region of interest (ROI) within the phantom image using 235 different texture metrics. We conducted the repeatability (test‐retest) and robustness (intra‐scanner) test on both the scanners and the reproducibility test was conducted by comparing the inter‐scanner differences in the repeatability and robustness to identify reliable CTTA metrics. Reliable metrics are those metrics that are repeatable, reproducible and robust. RESULTS: As expected, the robustness, repeatability and reproducibility of CTTA metrics are variably sensitive to various scanner and scanning parameters. Entropy of Fast Fourier Transform‐based texture metrics was overall most reliable across the two scanners and scanning conditions. Post‐processing techniques that reduce image noise while preserving the underlying edges associated with true anatomy or pathology bring about significant differences in radiomic reliability compared to when they were not used. CONCLUSION: Following large‐scale validation, identification of reliable CTTA metrics can aid in conducting large‐scale multicenter CTTA analysis using sample sets acquired using different imaging protocols, scanners etc.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6698768
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66987682019-08-22 Reliability of CT‐based texture features: Phantom study Varghese, Bino A. Hwang, Darryl Cen, Steven Y. Levy, Joshua Liu, Derek Lau, Christopher Rivas, Marielena Desai, Bhushan Goodenough, David J. Duddalwar, Vinay A. J Appl Clin Med Phys Medical Imaging OBJECTIVE: To determine the intra‐, inter‐ and test‐retest variability of CT‐based texture analysis (CTTA) metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, we conducted a series of CT imaging experiments using a texture phantom to evaluate the performance of a CTTA panel on routine abdominal imaging protocols. The phantom comprises of three different regions with various textures found in tumors. The phantom was scanned on two CT scanners viz. the Philips Brilliance 64 CT and Toshiba Aquilion Prime 160 CT scanners. The intra‐scanner variability of the CTTA metrics was evaluated across imaging parameters such as slice thickness, field of view, post‐reconstruction filtering, tube voltage, and tube current. For each scanner and scanning parameter combination, we evaluated the performance of eight different types of texture quantification techniques on a predetermined region of interest (ROI) within the phantom image using 235 different texture metrics. We conducted the repeatability (test‐retest) and robustness (intra‐scanner) test on both the scanners and the reproducibility test was conducted by comparing the inter‐scanner differences in the repeatability and robustness to identify reliable CTTA metrics. Reliable metrics are those metrics that are repeatable, reproducible and robust. RESULTS: As expected, the robustness, repeatability and reproducibility of CTTA metrics are variably sensitive to various scanner and scanning parameters. Entropy of Fast Fourier Transform‐based texture metrics was overall most reliable across the two scanners and scanning conditions. Post‐processing techniques that reduce image noise while preserving the underlying edges associated with true anatomy or pathology bring about significant differences in radiomic reliability compared to when they were not used. CONCLUSION: Following large‐scale validation, identification of reliable CTTA metrics can aid in conducting large‐scale multicenter CTTA analysis using sample sets acquired using different imaging protocols, scanners etc. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-06-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6698768/ /pubmed/31222919 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12666 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Medical Imaging
Varghese, Bino A.
Hwang, Darryl
Cen, Steven Y.
Levy, Joshua
Liu, Derek
Lau, Christopher
Rivas, Marielena
Desai, Bhushan
Goodenough, David J.
Duddalwar, Vinay A.
Reliability of CT‐based texture features: Phantom study
title Reliability of CT‐based texture features: Phantom study
title_full Reliability of CT‐based texture features: Phantom study
title_fullStr Reliability of CT‐based texture features: Phantom study
title_full_unstemmed Reliability of CT‐based texture features: Phantom study
title_short Reliability of CT‐based texture features: Phantom study
title_sort reliability of ct‐based texture features: phantom study
topic Medical Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6698768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31222919
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12666
work_keys_str_mv AT varghesebinoa reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT hwangdarryl reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT censteveny reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT levyjoshua reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT liuderek reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT lauchristopher reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT rivasmarielena reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT desaibhushan reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT goodenoughdavidj reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy
AT duddalwarvinaya reliabilityofctbasedtexturefeaturesphantomstudy