Cargando…

Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT

BACKGROUND: Despite current recommendations, there is no recent scientific study comparing the influence of CT reconstruction kernels on lung pattern recognition in interstitial lung disease (ILD). PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity of lung (i70) and soft (i30) CT kernel algorithms for the diagnos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Klaus, Jeremias B., Christodoulidis, Stergios, Peters, Alan A., Hourscht, Cynthia, Loebelenz, Laura I., Munz, Jaro, Schroeder, Christophe, Sieron, Dominik, Drakopoulos, Dionysios, Stadler, Severin, Heverhagen, Johannes T., Prosch, Helmut, Huber, Adrian, Pohl, Moritz, Mougiakakou, Stavroula G., Christe, Andreas, Ebner, Lukas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2022
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9805814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36067777
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1901-7814
_version_ 1784862410425761792
author Klaus, Jeremias B.
Christodoulidis, Stergios
Peters, Alan A.
Hourscht, Cynthia
Loebelenz, Laura I.
Munz, Jaro
Schroeder, Christophe
Sieron, Dominik
Drakopoulos, Dionysios
Stadler, Severin
Heverhagen, Johannes T.
Prosch, Helmut
Huber, Adrian
Pohl, Moritz
Mougiakakou, Stavroula G.
Christe, Andreas
Ebner, Lukas
author_facet Klaus, Jeremias B.
Christodoulidis, Stergios
Peters, Alan A.
Hourscht, Cynthia
Loebelenz, Laura I.
Munz, Jaro
Schroeder, Christophe
Sieron, Dominik
Drakopoulos, Dionysios
Stadler, Severin
Heverhagen, Johannes T.
Prosch, Helmut
Huber, Adrian
Pohl, Moritz
Mougiakakou, Stavroula G.
Christe, Andreas
Ebner, Lukas
author_sort Klaus, Jeremias B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite current recommendations, there is no recent scientific study comparing the influence of CT reconstruction kernels on lung pattern recognition in interstitial lung disease (ILD). PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity of lung (i70) and soft (i30) CT kernel algorithms for the diagnosis of ILD patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively extracted between 15–25 pattern annotations per case (1 annotation = 15 slices of 1 mm) from 23 subjects resulting in 408 annotation stacks per lung kernel and soft kernel reconstructions. Two subspecialized chest radiologists defined the ground truth in consensus. 4 residents, 2 fellows, and 2 general consultants in radiology with 3 to 13 years of experience in chest imaging performed a blinded readout. In order to account for data clustering, a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) with random intercept for reader and nested for patient and image and a kernel/experience interaction term was used to analyze the results. RESULTS: The results of the GLMM indicated, that the odds of correct pattern recognition is 12 % lower with lung kernel compared to soft kernel; however, this was not statistically significant (OR 0.88; 95%-CI, 0.73–1.06; p  = 0.187). Furthermore, the consultants’ odds of correct pattern recognition was 78 % higher than the residents’ odds, although this finding did not reach statistical significance either (OR 1.78; 95%-CI, 0.62–5.06; p  = 0.283). There was no significant interaction between the two fixed terms kernel and experience. Intra-rater agreement between lung and soft kernel was substantial (κ = 0.63 ± 0.19). The mean inter-rater agreement for lung/soft kernel was κ = 0.37 ± 0.17/κ = 0.38 ± 0.17. CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between lung and soft kernel reconstructed CT images for the correct pattern recognition in ILD. There are non-significant trends indicating that the use of soft kernels and a higher level of experience lead to a higher probability of correct pattern identification. KEY POINTS: There is no significant difference between lung and soft kernel reconstructed CT images for the correct pattern recognition in interstitial lung disease. There are even non-significant tendencies that the use of soft kernels lead to a higher probability of correct pattern identification. These results challenge the current recommendations and the routinely performed separate lung kernel reconstructions for lung parenchyma analysis. Citation Format: Klaus JB, Christodoulidis S, Peters AA et al. Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2023; 195: 47 – 54.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9805814
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98058142023-01-02 Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT Klaus, Jeremias B. Christodoulidis, Stergios Peters, Alan A. Hourscht, Cynthia Loebelenz, Laura I. Munz, Jaro Schroeder, Christophe Sieron, Dominik Drakopoulos, Dionysios Stadler, Severin Heverhagen, Johannes T. Prosch, Helmut Huber, Adrian Pohl, Moritz Mougiakakou, Stavroula G. Christe, Andreas Ebner, Lukas Rofo BACKGROUND: Despite current recommendations, there is no recent scientific study comparing the influence of CT reconstruction kernels on lung pattern recognition in interstitial lung disease (ILD). PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity of lung (i70) and soft (i30) CT kernel algorithms for the diagnosis of ILD patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively extracted between 15–25 pattern annotations per case (1 annotation = 15 slices of 1 mm) from 23 subjects resulting in 408 annotation stacks per lung kernel and soft kernel reconstructions. Two subspecialized chest radiologists defined the ground truth in consensus. 4 residents, 2 fellows, and 2 general consultants in radiology with 3 to 13 years of experience in chest imaging performed a blinded readout. In order to account for data clustering, a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) with random intercept for reader and nested for patient and image and a kernel/experience interaction term was used to analyze the results. RESULTS: The results of the GLMM indicated, that the odds of correct pattern recognition is 12 % lower with lung kernel compared to soft kernel; however, this was not statistically significant (OR 0.88; 95%-CI, 0.73–1.06; p  = 0.187). Furthermore, the consultants’ odds of correct pattern recognition was 78 % higher than the residents’ odds, although this finding did not reach statistical significance either (OR 1.78; 95%-CI, 0.62–5.06; p  = 0.283). There was no significant interaction between the two fixed terms kernel and experience. Intra-rater agreement between lung and soft kernel was substantial (κ = 0.63 ± 0.19). The mean inter-rater agreement for lung/soft kernel was κ = 0.37 ± 0.17/κ = 0.38 ± 0.17. CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between lung and soft kernel reconstructed CT images for the correct pattern recognition in ILD. There are non-significant trends indicating that the use of soft kernels and a higher level of experience lead to a higher probability of correct pattern identification. KEY POINTS: There is no significant difference between lung and soft kernel reconstructed CT images for the correct pattern recognition in interstitial lung disease. There are even non-significant tendencies that the use of soft kernels lead to a higher probability of correct pattern identification. These results challenge the current recommendations and the routinely performed separate lung kernel reconstructions for lung parenchyma analysis. Citation Format: Klaus JB, Christodoulidis S, Peters AA et al. Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2023; 195: 47 – 54. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2022-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9805814/ /pubmed/36067777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1901-7814 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Klaus, Jeremias B.
Christodoulidis, Stergios
Peters, Alan A.
Hourscht, Cynthia
Loebelenz, Laura I.
Munz, Jaro
Schroeder, Christophe
Sieron, Dominik
Drakopoulos, Dionysios
Stadler, Severin
Heverhagen, Johannes T.
Prosch, Helmut
Huber, Adrian
Pohl, Moritz
Mougiakakou, Stavroula G.
Christe, Andreas
Ebner, Lukas
Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT
title Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT
title_full Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT
title_fullStr Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT
title_full_unstemmed Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT
title_short Influence of Lung Reconstruction Algorithms on Interstitial Lung Pattern Recognition on CT
title_sort influence of lung reconstruction algorithms on interstitial lung pattern recognition on ct
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9805814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36067777
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1901-7814
work_keys_str_mv AT klausjeremiasb influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT christodoulidisstergios influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT petersalana influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT hourschtcynthia influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT loebelenzlaurai influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT munzjaro influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT schroederchristophe influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT sierondominik influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT drakopoulosdionysios influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT stadlerseverin influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT heverhagenjohannest influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT proschhelmut influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT huberadrian influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT pohlmoritz influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT mougiakakoustavroulag influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT christeandreas influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct
AT ebnerlukas influenceoflungreconstructionalgorithmsoninterstitiallungpatternrecognitiononct