Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of four software packages for CT lung volumetry in healthy individuals

  • Chest
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To compare CT lung volumetry (CTLV) measurements provided by different software packages, and to provide normative data for lung densitometric measurements in healthy individuals.

Methods

This retrospective study included 51 chest CTs of 17 volunteers (eight men and nine women; mean age, 30 ± 6 years), who underwent spirometrically monitored CT at total lung capacity (TLC), functional residual capacity (FRC), and mean inspiratory capacity (MIC). Volumetric differences assessed by four commercial software packages were compared with analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measurements and benchmarked against the threshold for acceptable variability between spirometric measurements. Mean lung density (MLD) and parenchymal heterogeneity (MLD-SD) were also compared with ANOVA.

Results

Volumetric differences ranged from 12 to 213 ml (0.20 % to 6.45 %). Although 16/18 comparisons (among four software packages at TLC, MIC, and FRC) were statistically significant (P < 0.001 to P = 0.004), only 3/18 comparisons, one at MIC and two at FRC, exceeded the spirometry variability threshold. MLD and MLD-SD significantly increased with decreasing volumes, and were significantly larger in lower compared to upper lobes (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Lung volumetric differences provided by different software packages are small. These differences should not be interpreted based on statistical significance alone, but together with absolute volumetric differences.

Key Points

• Volumetric differences, assessed by different CTLV software, are small but statistically significant.

• Volumetric differences are smaller at TLC than at MIC and FRC.

• Volumetric differences rarely exceed spirometric repeatability thresholds at MIC and FRC.

• Differences between CTLV measurements should be interpreted based on comparison of absolute differences.

• MLD increases with decreasing volumes, and is larger in lower compared to upper lobes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cohen J, Douma WR, van Ooijen PM et al (2008) Localization and quantification of regional and segmental air trapping in asthma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 32:562–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Salito C, Woods JC, Aliverti A (2011) Influence of CT reconstruction settings on extremely low attenuation values for specific gas volume calculation in severe emphysema. Acad Radiol 18:1277–1284

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Coxson HO, Nasute Fauerbach PV, Storness-Bliss C et al (2008) Computed tomography assessment of lung volume changes after bronchial valve treatment. Eur Respir J 32:1443–1450

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Becker MD, Berkmen YM, Austin JH et al (1998) Lung volumes before and after lung volume reduction surgery: quantitative CT analysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 157:1593–1599

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Holbert JM, Brown ML, Sciurba FC, Keenan RJ, Landreneau RJ, Holzer AD (1996) Changes in lung volume and volume of emphysema after unilateral lung reduction surgery: analysis with CT lung densitometry. Radiology 201:793–797

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yamashiro T, Matsuoka S, Bartholmai BJ et al (2010) Collapsibility of lung volume by paired inspiratory and expiratory CT scans: correlations with lung function and mean lung density. Acad Radiol 17:489–495

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yamashiro T, San José Estépar R, Matsuoka S et al (2011) Intrathoracic tracheal volume and collapsibility on inspiratory and end-expiratory ct scans correlations with lung volume and pulmonary function in 85 smokers. Acad Radiol 18:299–305

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Yilmaz C, Watharkar SS, Diaz de Leon A et al (2011) Quantification of regional interstitial lung disease from CT-derived fractional tissue volume: a lung tissue research consortium study. Acad Radiol 18:1014–1023

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Shin KE, Chung MJ, Jung MP, Choe BK, Lee KS (2011) Quantitative computed tomographic indexes in diffuse interstitial lung disease: correlation with physiologic tests and computed tomography visual scores. J Comput Assist Tomogr 35:266–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Iwano S, Okada T, Satake H, Naganawa S (2009) 3D-CT volumetry of the lung using multidetector row CT: comparison with pulmonary function tests. Acad Radiol 16:250–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Matsuo K, Iwano S, Okada T, Koike W, Naganawa S (2012) 3D-CT lung volumetry using multidetector row computed tomography: pulmonary function of each anatomic lobe. J Thorac Imaging 27:164–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chen F, Kubo T, Shoji T, Fujinaga T, Bando T, Date H (2011) Comparison of pulmonary function test and computed tomography volumetry in living lung donors. J Heart Lung Transplant 30:572–575

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kauczor HU, Heussel CP, Fischer B, Klamm R, Mildenberger P, Thelen M (1998) Assessment of lung volumes using helical CT at inspiration and expiration: comparison with pulmonary function tests. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:1091–1095

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zach JA, Newell JD Jr, Schroeder J et al (2012) Quantitative computed tomography of the lungs and airways in healthy nonsmoking adults. Investig Radiol 47:596–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hu S, Hoffman EA, Reinhardt JM (2001) Automatic lung segmentation for accurate quantitation of volumetric X-ray CT images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 20:490–498

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Brown MS, McNitt-Gray MF, Goldin JG et al (1999) Automated measurement of single and total lung volume from CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 23:632–640

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ukil S, Reinhardt JM (2005) Smoothing lung segmentation surfaces in three-dimensional X-ray CT images using anatomic guidance. Acad Radiol 12:1502–1511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kuhnigk JM, Dicken V, Zidowitz S et al (2005) Informatics in radiology (infoRAD): new tools for computer assistance in thoracic CT. Part 1. Functional analysis of lungs, lung lobes, and bronchopulmonary segments. Radiographics 25:525–536

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. van Rikxoort EM, Prokop M, de Hoop B, Viergever MA, Pluim JP, van Ginneken B (2010) Automatic segmentation of pulmonary lobes robust against incomplete fissures. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 29:1286–1296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Armato SG 3rd, Sensakovic WF (2004) Automated lung segmentation for thoracic CT impact on computer-aided diagnosis. Acad Radiol 11:1011–1021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Leader JK, Zheng B, Rogers RM et al (2003) Automated lung segmentation in X-ray computed tomography: development and evaluation of a heuristic threshold-based scheme. Acad Radiol 10:1224–1236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Come CE, Diaz AA, Curran-Everett D et al (2013) COPDGene Investigators. Characterizing functional lung heterogeneity in COPD using reference equations for CT scan-measured lobar volumes. Chest 143:1607–1617

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Vestbo J, Edwards LD, Scanlon PD et al (2011) ECLIPSE Investigators. Changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 second over time in COPD. N Engl J Med 365:1184–1192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Diaz AA, Han MK, Come CE et al (2013) Effect of emphysema on CT scan measures of airway dimensions in smokers. Chest 143:687–693

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Dufresne V, Knoop C, Van Muylem A et al (2009) Effect of systemic inflammation on inspiratory and limb muscle strength and bulk in cystic fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 180:153–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pellegrino R, Viegi G, Brusasco V et al (2005) Interpretative strategies for lung function tests. Eur Respir J 26:948–968

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wanger J, Clausen JL, Coates A et al (2005) Standardisation of the measurement of lung volumes. Eur Respir J 26:511–522

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bankier AA, O’Donnell CR, Boiselle PM (2008) Quality initiatives. Respiratory instructions for CT examinations of the lungs: a hands-on guide. Radiographics 28:919–931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Miller MR, Hankinson J, Brusasco V et al (2005) ATS/ERS Task Force. Standardisation of spirometry. Eur Respir J 26:319–338

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Timmins SC, Diba C, Farrow CE et al (2012) The relationship between airflow obstruction, emphysema extent, and small airways function in COPD. Chest 142:312–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Reinhardt J, Sonka M, McLennan G, Hoffman E, Ukil S (2011) Methods of smoothing segmented regions and related devices. United States patent no. 8,073,210 B2

  32. Vilke GM, Chan TC, Neuman T, Clausen JL (2000) Spirometry in normal subjects in sitting, prone, and supine positions. Respir Care 45:407–410

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Brown MS, Kim HJ, Abtin F et al (2010) Reproducibility of lung and lobar volume measurements using computed tomography. Acad Radiol 17:316–322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Bankier AA, Van Muylem A, Knoop C, Estenne M, Gevenois PA (2001) Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome in heart-lung transplant recipients: diagnosis with expiratory CT. Radiology 218:533–539

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Haas M, Hamm B, Niehues SM (2014) Automated lung volumetry from routine thoracic CT scans: how reliable is the result? Acad Radiol 21:633–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Boedeker KL, McNitt-Gray MF, Rogers SR et al (2004) Emphysema: effect of reconstruction algorithm on CT imaging measures. Radiology 232:295–301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Molinari F, Amato M, Stefanetti M et al (2010) Density-based MDCT quantification of lobar lung volumes: a study of inter- and intraobserver reproducibility. Radiol Med 115:516–525

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chong D, Brown MS, Kim HJ et al (2012) Reproducibility of volume and densitometric measures of emphysema on repeat computed tomography with an interval of 1 week. Eur Radiol 22:287–294

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Celli BR, Locantore N, Yates J et al (2012) ECLIPSE Investigators. Inflammatory biomarkers improve clinical prediction of mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 185:1065–1072

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Professor Dr. Alexander A. Bankier. A. A. Bankier is a consultant for Spiration (Olympus Medical Systems) and has received authorship honoraria from Elsevier. No conflict of interest is known from the other co-authors. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. Professor Dr. Alexander A. Bankier (senior author) has significant statistical expertise and provided statistical advice for this manuscript. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board. Our study population was a group of healthy volunteers that had served as control subjects in a previous clinical study (Dufresne V. et al. Effect of systemic inflammation on inspiratory and limb muscle strength and bulk in cystic fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2009). Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for both the initial CT data acquisitions on which this study was based, and for the analysis of the CT data for the current retrospective study. Methodology: retrospective, performed at one institution.

Conflict of interest

A. A. Bankier is a consultant for Spiration (Olympus Medical Systems) and has received authorship honoraria from Elsevier. No conflict of interest is known from the other co-authors. The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Stefan F. Nemec, Mario Silva & Alexander A. Bankier

  2. Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria

    Stefan F. Nemec

  3. Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille, 2 avenue Oscar Lambret, 59037, Lille, France

    Francesco Molinari

  4. Pneumologie, CHU de Charleroi – Hôpital Vésale, Rue de Gozé 706, 6110, Montigny-le-Tilleul, Belgium

    Valerie Dufresne

  5. Service d’Imagerie Médicale, CHU Tivoli, Avenue Max Buset 34, 7100, La Louvière, Belgium

    Natacha Gosset

Authors
  1. Stefan F. Nemec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesco Molinari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Valerie Dufresne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Natacha Gosset
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mario Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Alexander A. Bankier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan F. Nemec.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nemec, S.F., Molinari, F., Dufresne, V. et al. Comparison of four software packages for CT lung volumetry in healthy individuals. Eur Radiol 25, 1588–1597 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3557-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3557-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation