Abstract
AbstractComputed tomography in suspected urolithiasis provides information about the presence, location and size of stones. Particularly stone size is a key parameter in treatment decision; however, data on impact of reformatation and measurement strategies is sparse. This study aimed to investigate the influence of different image reformatations, slice thicknesses and window settings on stone size measurements. Reference stone sizes of 47 kidney stones representative for clinically encountered compositions were measured manually using a digital caliper (Man-M). Afterwards stones were placed in a 3D-printed, semi-anthropomorphic phantom, and scanned using a low dose protocol (CTDIvol 2 mGy). Images were reconstructed using hybrid-iterative and model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms (HIR, MBIR) with different slice thicknesses. Two independent readers measured largest stone diameter on axial (2 mm and 5 mm) and multiplanar reformatations (based upon 0.67 mm reconstructions) using different window settings (soft-tissue and bone). Statistics were conducted using ANOVA ± correction for multiple comparisons. Overall stone size in CT was underestimated compared to Man-M (8.8 ± 2.9 vs. 7.7 ± 2.7 mm, p < 0.05), yet closely correlated (r = 0.70). Reconstruction algorithm and slice thickness did not significantly impact measurements (p > 0.05), while image reformatations and window settings did (p < 0.05). CT measurements using multiplanar reformatation with a bone window setting showed closest agreement with Man-M (8.7 ± 3.1 vs. 8.8 ± 2.9 mm, p < 0.05, r = 0.83). Manual CT-based stone size measurements are most accurate using multiplanar image reformatation with a bone window setting, while measurements on axial planes with different slice thicknesses underestimate true stone size. Therefore, this procedure is recommended when impacting treatment decision.
Funder
Koeln Fortune Program / Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne
Else Kröner-Fresenius-Stiftung
Universitätsklinikum Köln
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference30 articles.
1. Khan, S. R. et al. Correction: Kidney stones. Nat. Rev. Dis. Prim. 3, 1 (2017).
2. Türk, C. et al. EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis 2018. in European Association of Urology Guidelines. 2018 Edition. vol. presented (The European Association of Urology Guidelines Office, 2018).
3. Assimos, D. et al. Surgical management of stones: American urological association/endourological society guideline, PART I. J. Urol. 196, 1153–1160 (2016).
4. Pan, X., Sidky, E. Y. & Vannier, M. Why do commercial CT scanners still employ traditional, filtered back-projection for image reconstruction?. Inverse Probl. 25, 1–50 (2010).
5. Chang, D. et al. Low-dose computed tomography of urolithiasis in obese patients: A feasibility study to evaluate image reconstruction algorithms. Diabetes Metab. Syndr. Obes. Targets Ther. 12, 439–445 (2019).
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献