Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 14–22 | Cite as

Detection of pulmonary nodules at multirow-detector CT: effectiveness of double reading to improve sensitivity at standard-dose and low-dose chest CT

  • Dag Wormanns
  • Karl Ludwig
  • Florian Beyer
  • Walter Heindel
  • Stefan Diederich
Chest

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of double reading to increase the sensitivity of lung nodule detection at standard-dose (SDCT) and low-dose multirow-detector CT (LDCT). SDCT (100 mAs effective tube current) and LDCT (20 mAs) of nine patients with pulmonary metastases were obtained within 5 min using four-row detector CT. Softcopy images reconstructed with 5-mm slice thickness were read by three radiologists independently. Images with 1.25-mm slice thickness served as the gold standard. Sensitivity was assessed for single readers and combinations. The effectiveness of double reading was expressed as the increase of sensitivity. Average sensitivity for detection of 390 nodules (size 3.9±3.2 mm) for single readers was 0.63 (SDCT) and 0.64 (LDCT). Double reading significantly increased sensitivity to 0.74 and 0.79, respectively. No significant difference between sensitivity at SDCT and LDCT was observed. The percentage of nodules detected by all three readers concordantly was 52% for SDCT and 47% for LDCT. Although double reading increased the detection rate of pulmonary nodules from 63% to 74–79%, a considerable proportion of nodules remained undetected. No difference between sensitivities at LDCT and SDCT for detection of small nodules was observed.

Keywords

Computed tomography Pulmonary nodule Sensitivity 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to express their thanks to Robert Kralemann for his support in the practical realization of the study and for entering the data into the computer system.

References

  1. 1.
    Kaneko M, Eguchi K, Ohmatsu H, Kakinuma R, Naruke T, Suemasu K, Moriyama N (1996) Peripheral lung cancer: screening and detection with low-dose spiral CT versus radiography. Radiology 201:798–802PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sone S, Takashima S, Li F, Yang Z, Honda T, Maruyama Y, Hasegawa M, Yamanda T, Kubo K, Hanamura K, Asakura K (1998) Mass screening for lung cancer with mobile spiral computed tomography scanner. Lancet 351:1242–1245CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, Naidich DP, McGuinness G, Miettinen OS, Libby DM, Pasmantier MW, Koizumi J, Altorki NK, Smith JP (1999) Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 354:99–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Diederich S, Wormanns D, Semik M, Thomas M, Lenzen H, Roos N, Heindel W (2002) Screening for early lung cancer with low-dose spiral CT: prevalence in 817 asymptomatic smokers. Radiology 222:773–781PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Swensen SJ, Jett JR, Sloan JA, Midthun DE, Hartman TE, Sykes AM, Aughenbaugh GL, Zink FE, Hillman SL, Noetzel GR, Marks RS, Clayton AC, Pairolero PC (2002) Screening for lung cancer with low-dose spiral computed tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 165:508–513PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pastorino U, Bellomi M, Landoni C, De Fiori E, Arnaldi P, Picchio M, Pelosi G, Boyle P, Fazio F (2003) Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year results. Lancet 362:593–597CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yankelevitz DF, Reeves AP, Kostis WJ, Zhao B, Henschke CI (2000) Small pulmonary nodules: volumetrically determined growth rates based on CT evaluation. Radiology 217:251–256PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Takashima S, Sone S, Li F, Maruyama Y, Hasegawa M, Kadoya M (2003) Indeterminate solitary pulmonary nodules revealed at population-based CT screening of the lung: using first follow-up diagnostic CT to differentiate benign and malignant lesions. Am J Roentgenol 180:1255–1263Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seltzer SE, Judy PF, Adams DF, Jacobson FL, Stark P, Kikinis R, Swensson RG, Hooton S, Head B, Feldman U (1995) Spiral CT of the chest: comparison of cine and film-based viewing. Radiology 197:73–78PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Diederich S, Semik M, Lentschig MG, Winter F, Scheld HH, Roos N, Bongartz G (1999) Helical CT of pulmonary nodules in patients with extrathoracic malignancy: CT-surgical correlation. Am J Roentgenol 172:353–360Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kozuka T, Johkoh T, Hamada S, Naito H, Tomiyama N, Koyama M, Mihara N, Honda O, Nakamura H, Kudo M (2003) Detection of pulmonary metastases with multi-detector row CT scans of 5-mm nominal section thickness: autopsy lung study. Radiology 226:231–234PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wormanns D, Fiebich M, Saidi M, Diederich S, Heindel W (2002) Automatic detection of pulmonary nodules at spiral CT: clinical application of a computer-aided diagnosis system. Eur Radiol 12:1052–1057CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rusinek H, Naidich DP, McGuinness G, Leitman BS, McCauley DI, Krinsky GA, Clayton K, Cohen H (1998) Pulmonary nodule detection: low-dose versus conventional CT. Radiology 209:243–249PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gartenschläger M, Schweden F, Gast K, Westermeier T, Kauczor H, von Zitzewitz H, Thelen M (1998) Pulmonary nodules: detection with low-dose vs conventional-dose spiral CT. Eur Radiol 8:609–614CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Diederich S, Lenzen H, Windmann R, Puskas Z, Yelbuz TM, Henneken S, Klaiber T, Eameri M, Roos N, Peters PE (1999) Pulmonary nodules: experimental and clinical studies at low-dose CT. Radiology 213:289–298PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Karabulut N, Toru M, Gelebek V, Gulsun M, Ariyurek OM (2002) Comparison of low-dose and standard-dose helical CT in the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. Eur Radiol 12:2764–2769PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ciatto S, Rosselli DT, Burke P, Visioli C, Paci E, Zappa M (2003) Comparison of standard and double reading and computer-aided detection (CAD) of interval cancers at prior negative screening mammograms: blind review. Br J Cancer 89:1645–1649CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Naidich DP, Marshall CH, Gribbin C, Arams RS, McCauley DI (1990) Low-dose CT of the lungs: preliminary observations. Radiology 175:729–731PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Novak CL, Qian J, Fan L, Ko JP, Rubinowitz AN, McGuiness G, Naidich DP (2002) Inter-observer variations on interpretation of multi-slice CT lung cancer screening studies, and the implications for computer-aided diagnosis. Proceedings of SPIE 4684: 68–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wormanns D, Beyer F, Diederich S, Ludwig K, Heindel W (2004) Diagnostic performance of a commercially available computer-aided diagnosis system for automatic detection of pulmonary nodules: comparison with single and double reading. Fortschr Roentgenstr 176:953–958Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marten K, Seyfarth T, Auer F, Wiener E, Grillhosl A, Obenauer S, Rummeny EJ, Engelke C (2004) Computer-assisted detection of pulmonary nodules: performance evaluation of an expert knowledge-based detection system in consensus reading with experienced and inexperienced chest radiologists. Eur Radiol 14:1930–1938CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Diederich S, Thomas M, Semik M, Lenzen H, Roos N, Weber A, Heindel W, Wormanns D (2004) Screening for early lung cancer with low-dose spiral computed tomography: results of annual follow-up examinations in asymptomatic smokers. Eur Radiol 14:691–702CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fischbach F, Knollmann F, Griesshaber V, Freund T, Akkol E, Felix R (2003) Detection of pulmonary nodules by multislice computed tomography: improved detection rate with reduced slice thickness. Eur Radiol 13:2378–2383CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dag Wormanns
    • 1
  • Karl Ludwig
    • 1
    • 2
  • Florian Beyer
    • 1
  • Walter Heindel
    • 1
  • Stefan Diederich
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Clinical RadiologyUniversity Hospital MünsterMünsterGermany
  2. 2.Section Diagnostic Radiology, Department of OrthopedicsUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  3. 3.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional RadiologyMarien-Hospital DüsseldorfDüsseldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations