A phantom study of nodule size evaluation with chest tomosynthesis and computed tomography

• Published in: Radiation protection dosimetry 2010-04, Vol.139 (1-3), p.140-143
• Main Authors: Johnsson, Å. A., Svalkvist, A., Vikgren, J., Boijsen, M., Flinck, A., Kheddache, S., Båth, M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Algorithms; Computer-Assisted; Humans; Imaging; Lung Neoplasms; Lung Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; methods; Phantoms; Phantoms, Imaging; Radiographic Image Enhancement; Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods; Radiographic Image Interpretation; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods; radiography; Radiography, Thoracic - methods; Radiologi och bildbehandling; Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Solitary Pulmonary Nodule; Solitary Pulmonary Nodule - diagnostic imaging; Thoracic; Tomography; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods; X-Ray Computed
• ISSN: 0144-8420; 1742-3406; 1742-3406
• DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncq003

The aim of the present study was to investigate nodule size measurements with chest tomosynthesis (TS) and computed tomography (CT). A 26-mm thick phantom, composed of a Polylite block with embedded spheres of different materials and sizes (4–20 mm), was scanned by both CT and TS. Six observers without prior knowledge of the true diameters of the spheres independently measured the diameter of the spheres on the CT and TS images. Four observers were allowed to change the window settings and two of the observers used predetermined fixed viewing conditions. The mean relative errors for all observers and all measured spheres compared with the known diameter of the spheres were 1.4 % (standard deviation, SD: 5.4 %) on CT images and −1.1 % (SD: 5.0 %) on TS images. With regard to the four observers where the window settings were at the discretion of the observer, the mean relative errors were 1.4 % (SD: 6.4 %) on CT images and −1.7 % (SD: 5.7 %) on TS images. Regarding the two observers using identical viewing conditions the mean relative error was 1.5 % (SD: 2.8 %) on CT images and 0.2 % (SD: 2.6 %) on TS images. In conclusion, the study suggests that nodule size measurements on chest TS might be an alternative to measurements on CT.