Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 29, Issue 4, pp 1665–1673 | Cite as

Initial clinical evaluation of stationary digital chest tomosynthesis in adult patients with cystic fibrosis

  • Elias Taylor GunnellEmail author
  • Dora K. Franceschi
  • Christina R. Inscoe
  • Allison Hartman
  • Jennifer L. Goralski
  • Agathe Ceppe
  • Brian Handly
  • Cassandra Sams
  • Lynn Ansley Fordham
  • Jianping Lu
  • Otto Zhou
  • Yueh Z. Lee
Chest
  • 68 Downloads

Abstract

Objective

The imaging evaluation of cystic fibrosis currently relies on chest radiography or computed tomography. Recently, digital chest tomosynthesis has been proposed as an alternative. We have developed a stationary digital chest tomosynthesis (s-DCT) system based on a carbon nanotube (CNT) linear x-ray source array. This system enables tomographic imaging without movement of the x-ray tube and allows for physiological gating. The goal of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of clinical CF imaging with the s-DCT system.

Materials and methods

CF patients undergoing clinically indicated chest radiography were recruited for the study and imaged on the s-DCT system. Three board-certified radiologists reviewed both the CXR and s-DCT images for image quality relevant to CF. CF disease severity was assessed by Brasfield score on CXR and chest tomosynthesis score on s-DCT. Disease severity measures were also evaluated against subject pulmonary function tests.

Results

Fourteen patients underwent s-DCT imaging within 72 h of their chest radiograph imaging. Readers scored the visualization of proximal bronchi, small airways and vascular pattern higher on s-DCT than CXR. Correlation between the averaged Brasfield score and averaged tomosynthesis disease severity score for CF was -0.73, p = 0.0033. The CF disease severity score system for tomosynthesis had high correlation with FEV1 (r = -0.685) and FEF 25–75% (r = -0.719) as well as good correlation with FVC (r = -0.582).

Conclusion

We demonstrate the potential of CNT x-ray-based s-DCT for use in the evaluation of cystic fibrosis disease status in the first clinical study of s-DCT.

Key Points

Carbon nanotube-based linear array x-ray tomosynthesis systems have the potential to provide diagnostically relevant information for patients with cystic fibrosis without the need for a moving gantry.

Despite the short angular span in this prototype system, lung features such as the proximal bronchi, small airways and pulmonary vasculature have improved visualization on s-DCT compared with CXR. Further improvements are anticipated with longer linear x-ray array tubes.

Evaluation of disease severity in CF patients is possible with s-DCT, yielding improved visualization of important lung features and high correlation with pulmonary function tests at a relatively low dose.

Keywords

Tomography Nanotubes, Carbon X-rays Cystic fibrosis Scoring methods 

Abbreviations

AFVR

Adapted fan-beam volume reconstruction

CF

Cystic fibrosis

CNT

Carbon nanotube

DCT

Digital chest tomosynthesis

FEF 25–75%

Forced expiratory flow at 25–75% of the pulmonary volume

FEV1

Forced expiratory volume during the first second

FVC

Forced vital capacity

ICCs

Intra-class correlation coefficients

LCA

Lateral costophrenic angles

PFTs

Pulmonary function tests

s-DCT

Stationary digital chest tomosynthesis

Notes

Funding

This project was supported by a Translational Team Science Award with funding provided by the UNC School of Medicine and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, through grant award no. UL1TR001111. This work is partially supported by the NCI-funded Carolina Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence (5U54CA151652), a grant from the NCI (5R21CA185741) and The University of North Carolina School of Medicine Team Translation Science Award (TTSA001P2). Dr. Goralski was supported by the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, grant award nos. GORALS16C0 and GORALS12L0. This project was further supported by the Howard Holderness Distinguished Medical Scholar grant. Hardware support was also provided by Carestream Health Inc. (Rochester, NY).

Compliance with ethical standards

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Dr. Yueh Lee MD, PhD.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare relationships with the following companies:

Drs. Lee, Zhou and Lu are co-inventors of the stationary chest tomosynthesis imaging system evaluated in this study. Dr. Zhou has equity ownership and serves on the board of directors of Xintek, Inc., to which the technologies used or evaluated in this article have been or will be licensed. Dr. Lu has equity ownership in Xintek, Inc. All of these relationships are under management by the University of North Carolina's COI committees.

Statistics and biometry

Mrs. Agathe Ceppe, MS, kindly provided statistical advice for this manuscript.

Marsico Lung Institute, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• experimental

• performed at one institution

Supplementary material

330_2018_5703_MOESM1_ESM.avi (119.5 mb)
ESM 1 (AVI 122356 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Sly PD, Gangell CL, Chen L et al (2013) Risk factors for bronchiectasis in children with cystic fibrosis. N Engl J Med 368(21):1963–1970Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cleveland RH, Sawicki GS, Stamoulis C (2015) Similar performance of Brasfield and Wisconsin scoring systems in young children with cystic fibrosis. Pediatr Radiol 45(11):1624–1628CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    (2016) Patient Registry Annual Data Report. Cyst Fibros Found Patient Regist. Available via https://www.cff.org/Research/Researcher-Resources/Patient-Registry/2016-Patient-Registry-Annual-Data-Report.pdf
  4. 4.
    Dournes G, Menut F, Macey J et al (2016) Lung morphology assessment of cystic fibrosis using MRI with ultra-short echo time at submillimeter spatial resolution. Eur Radiol 26(11):3811–3820Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chou HS, Kicska GA, Pipavath SN, Reddy GP (2014) Digital tomosynthesis of the chest: current and emerging applications. Radiographics 34(2):359–372CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dobbins JT 3rd, McAdams HP, Godfrey DJ, Li CM (2008) Digital tomosynthesis of the chest. J Thorac Imaging 23(2):86–92Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Terzi A, Bertolaccini L, Viti A et al (2013) Lung cancer detection with digital chest tomosynthesis: baseline results from the observational study SOS. J Thorac Oncol 8(6):685–692Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vult von Steyern K, Björkman-Burtscher I, Geijer M (2011) Tomosynthesis in pulmonary cystic fibrosis with comparison to radiography and computed tomography: a pictorial review. Insights Imaging 3(1):81–89CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vult von Steyern KV, Björkman-Burtscher I, Geijer M (2013) Radiography, tomosynthesis, CT and MRI in the evaluation of pulmonary cystic fibrosis: an untangling review of the multitude of scoring systems. Insights Imaging 4(6):787–798Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vult von Steyern KV, Björkman-Burtscher I, Geijer M (2012) Tomosynthesis in pulmonary cystic fibrosis with comparison to radiography and computed tomography: a pictorial review. Insights Imaging 3(1):81–89Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vult von Steyern KV, Björkman-Burtscher I, Weber L, Höglund P, Geijer M (2014) Effective dose from chest tomosynthesis in children. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 158(3):290–298Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee YZ, Burk LM, Wang KH et al (2011) Prospective respiratory gated carbon nanotube micro computed tomography. Acad Radiol 18(5):588–593Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shan J, Tucker AW, Lee YZ et al (2015) Stationary chest tomosynthesis using a carbon nanotube x-ray source array: a feasibility study. Phys Med Biol 60(1):–81Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hartman AE, Shan J, Wu G et al (2016) Initial clinical evaluation of stationary digital chest tomosynthesis. Proc. SPIE 9783, Medical Imaging: Physics of Medical Imaging, 978366. Available from:  https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2216850
  15. 15.
    Wu G, Inscoe C, Calliste J, Lee YZ, Zhou O, Jianping L (2015) Adapted fan-beam volume reconstruction for stationary digital breast tomosynthesis. Proceedings Volume 9412, Medical Imaging: Physics of Medical Imaging, 94123J. Available from:  https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2081931
  16. 16.
    Brasfield D, Hicks G, Soong S, Peters J, Tiller R (1980) Evaluation of scoring system of the chest radiograph in cystic fibrosis: a collaborative study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 134(6):1195–1198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vult von Steyern K, Björkman-Burtscher I, Höglund P, Bozovic G, Wiklund M, Geijer M (2012) Description and validation of a scoring system for tomosynthesis in pulmonary cystic fibrosis. Eur Radiol 22(12):2718–2728CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Choo JY, Lee KY, Yu A et al (2016) A comparison of digital tomosynthesis and chest radiography in evaluating airway lesions using computed tomography as a reference. Eur Radiol 26(9):3147–3154Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yamada Y, Jinzaki M, Hashimoto M et al (2013) Tomosynthesis for the early detection of pulmonary emphysema: diagnostic performance compared with chest radiography, using multidetector computed tomography as reference. Eur Radiol 23(8):2118–2126Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Galea A, Dubbins P, Riordan R, Adlan T, Roobottom C, Gay D (2015) The value of digital tomosynthesis of the chest as a problem-solving tool for suspected pulmonary nodules and hilar lesions detected on chest radiography. Eur J Radiol 84(5):1012–1018CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kalra MK, Maher MM, Rizzo S, Kanarek D, Shephard JA (2004) Radiation exposure from Chest CT: issues and strategies. J Korean Med Sci 19(2):159–166CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Diederich S, Lenzen H (2000) Radiation exposure associated with imaging of the chest: comparison of different radiographic and computed tomography techniques. Cancer 89(11 Suppl):2457–2460CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    (1991) 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 21(1–3):1–201. Available from: http://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=icrp%20publication%2060
  24. 24.
    Wiest PW, Locken JA, Heintz PH, Mettler FA Jr (2002) CT scanning: a major source of radiation exposure. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 23(5):402–410Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sabol JM (2009) A Monte Carlo estimation of effective dose in chest tomosynthesis. Med Phys 36(12):5480–5487CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Båth M, Svalkvist A, von Wrangel A, Rismyhr-Olsson H, Cederblad A (2010) Effective dose to patients from chest examinations with tomosynthesis. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 139(1–3):153–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Johnsson ÅA, Vikgren J, Båth M (2014) A retrospective study of chest tomosynthesis as a tool for optimizing the use of computed tomography resources and reducing patient radiation exposure. Acad Radiol 21(11):1427–1433CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Aliasgharzadeh A, Mihandoost E, Masoumbeigi M, Salimian M, Mohseni M (2015) Measurement of entrance skin dose and calculation of effective dose for common diagnostic X-ray examinations in Kashan, Iran. Glob J Health Sci 7(5):202–207CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hwang HS, Chung MJ, Lee KS (2013) Digital tomosynthesis of the chest: comparison of patient exposure dose and image quality between standard default setting and low dose setting. Korean J Radiol 14(3):525–531CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Corey M, Edwards L, Levison H, Knowles M (1997) Longitudinal analysis of pulmonary function decline in patients with cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr 131(6):809–814CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kerem E, Reisman J, Corey M, Canny GJ, Levison H (1992) Prediction of mortality in patients with cystic fibrosis. N Engl J Med 326(18):1187–1191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tepper RS, Hiatt PW, Eigen H, Smith J (1987) Total respiratory system compliance in asymptomatic infants with cystic fibrosis. Am Rev Respir Dis 135(5):1075–1079PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Beardsmore C (1996) Lung function from infancy to school age in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 73:519–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Beydon N, Amsallem F, Bellet M et al (2002) Pulmonary function tests in preschool children with cystic fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 166(8):1099–1104Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Logan PM, O’Laoide RM, Mulherin D, O’Mahony S, FitzGerald MX, Masterson JB (1996) High resolution computed tomography in cystic fibrosis: correlation with pulmonary function and assessment of prognostic value. Ir J Med Sci 165(1):27–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vikgren J, Zachrisson S, Svalkvist A et al (2008) Comparison of chest tomosynthesis and chest radiography for detection of pulmonary nodules: human observer study of clinical cases. Radiology 249(3):1034–1041Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shan J, Burk L, Wu G et al (2015) Prospective gated chest tomosynthesis using CNT X-ray source array. Proceedings Volume 9412, Medical Imaging: Physics of Medical Imaging, 941242. Available from:  https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2081701
  38. 38.
    Gomi T, Nakajima M, Fujiwara H et al (2012) Comparison between chest digital tomosynthesis and CT as a screening method to detect artificial pulmonary nodules: a phantom study. Br J Radiol 85(1017):e622–e629Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Chawla AS, Lo JY, Baker JA, Samei E (2009) Optimized image acquisition for breast tomosynthesis in projection and reconstruction space. Med Phys 36(11):4859–4869CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Chan HP, Goodsitt MM, Helvie MA et al (2014) Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance of clustered microcalcification detection on breast phantom images acquired with an experimental system using variable scan angles, angular increments, and number of projection views. Radiology 273(3):675–685Google Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elias Taylor Gunnell
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dora K. Franceschi
    • 1
  • Christina R. Inscoe
    • 2
  • Allison Hartman
    • 2
  • Jennifer L. Goralski
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
  • Agathe Ceppe
    • 3
  • Brian Handly
    • 6
  • Cassandra Sams
    • 6
  • Lynn Ansley Fordham
    • 6
  • Jianping Lu
    • 2
  • Otto Zhou
    • 2
  • Yueh Z. Lee
    • 2
    • 3
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8
  1. 1.School of MedicineThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Department of Physics and AstronomyThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  3. 3.Marsico Lung InstituteThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  4. 4.Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care MedicineThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  5. 5.Division of Pediatric PulmonologyThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  6. 6.Department of RadiologyThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  7. 7.Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer CenterThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  8. 8.Biomedical Research Imaging CenterThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations