Added Value of Ultra-low-dose Computed Tomography, Dose Equivalent to Chest X-Ray Radiography, for Diagnosing Chest Pathology

Lucia J M Kroft, Levinia van der Velden, Irene Hernández Girón, Joost J H Roelofs, Albert de Roos, Jacob Geleijns, Lucia J M Kroft, Levinia van der Velden, Irene Hernández Girón, Joost J H Roelofs, Albert de Roos, Jacob Geleijns

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical value of ultra-low-dose computed tomography (ULDCT) compared with chest x-ray radiography (CXR) for diagnosing chest pathology.

Materials and methods: A total of 200 patients referred for CXR by outpatient clinics or general practitioners were enrolled prospectively. They underwent CXR (posteroanterior and lateral) and ULDCT (120 kV, 3 mAs) on the same day. In-room time and effective dose were recorded for each examination. Studies were categorized whether they were diagnostic or not, relevant radiologic diagnostic findings were reported, and confidence for diagnosis was recorded by a Likert scale. Differences in diagnostic confidence and effect on management decision were compared.

Results: In-room time was <2 minutes for CXR and <3 minutes for ULDCT. Effective dose was 0.040 mSv for CXR and 0.071 mSv for ULDCT. CXR was considered diagnostic in 98% and ULDCT in 100%. The mean perceived confidence for diagnosis was 88±12% with CXR and 98±2% with ULDCT (P<0.0001), whereas discrepant findings between CXR and ULDCT were found in 101 of 200 patients. As compared with CXR, ULDCT had added value for management decisions in 40 of 200 patients.

Conclusions: ULDCT provided added value to the radiologist by improved perceived confidence with a reduction in false-positive and false-negative CXR investigations that had management implications in 20% of patients. The effective dose of ULDCT will not be a limiting factor for introducing ULDCT of the chest on a broad scale in clinical practice.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
A 72-year-old male patient with metastasized melanoma and immunotherapy with recent pneumonia has recurrent fever of 40°C (104°F). The clinical question was “pneumonia?” CXR posteroanterior (A, C) and lateral projections (B, D). Small residual lesion in the left lower lobe (A, B, arrow in A) from previous pneumonia that has been resorbed; there are no signs of active pneumonia. CXR perceived confidence for diagnosis was 95%. Pneumonia 6 weeks before (C, D, encircled). In-room time was 110 seconds, effective dose 0.03 mSv.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Same patient as in Figure 1. ULDCT from below, enlarged lymph nodes were excluded. Multiple foci with tree-in-bud aspect in the right lower lobe (A–C, encircled), not observed on CXR. A band-like density in the left lower lobe after previous pneumonia (B, C, arrow). ULDCT perceived confidence for diagnosis was 100%. Fever may be caused by immunotherapy itself, although the combination of illness, fever, and tree-in-bud pattern is likely active infection. The referring physician was contacted for expected therapeutic consequences. In-room time was 168 seconds, effective dose was 0.08 mSv.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
A 70-year-old male patient with myasthenia gravis autoimmune disease. The clinical question was “pathology?” CXR posteroanterior (A) and lateral (B) projections. Two nodules project on the posteroanterior image (arrows), one possibly in the lower lobe on the lateral view (arrow) but for the other with location unsure (intrapulmonary or not), and the morphology could not be characterized. CXR perceived confidence was 50% for presence of intrapulmonary nodules. On CXR, there were no signs of thymus enlargement, although this could not be excluded. In-room time was 96 seconds, effective dose was 0.04 mSv.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Same patient as in Figure 3. ULDCT from below, showing multiple intrapulmonary smooth-walled nodules with certainty that were indeterminate on CXR (A–E, arrows). Differential diagnosis was nodules due to the autoimmune disease, or use of azathioprine medication, or infectious. Thymus hyperplasia or thymoma was excluded (F). ULDCT perceived confidence for diagnosis was 100%. ULDCT provides more information with better confidence. In-room time was 156 seconds, effective dose was 0.08 mSv.

References

    1. Ebner L, Bütikofer Y, Ott D, et al. Lung nodule detection by microdose CT versus chest radiography (standard and dual-energy subtracted). AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:727–735.
    1. Copley SJ, Coren M, Nicholson AG, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of thin-section CT and chest radiography of pediatric interstitial lung disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:549–554.
    1. Schueller G, Matzek W, Kalhs P, et al. Pulmonary infections in the late period after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation: chest radiography versus computed tomography. Eur J Radiol. 2005;53:489–494.
    1. European Union. European Commission Radiation Protection No. 180. Medical radiation exposure of the European population, 2014. Doi:10.2833/708119.
    1. Christe A, Charimo-Torrente J, Roychoudhury K, et al. Accuracy of low-dose computed tomography (CT) for detecting and characterizing the most common CT-patterns of pulmonary disease. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:e142–e150.
    1. Neroladaki A, Botsikas D, Boudabbous S, et al. Computed tomography of the chest with model-based iterative reconstruction using a radiation exposure similar to chest x-ray examination: preliminary observations. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:360–366.
    1. Khawaja RDA, Singh S, Madan R, et al. Ultra-low dose chest CT using filtered back projection: comparison of 80-, 100- and 120 kVp protocols in a prospective randomized study. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:1934–1944.
    1. Kim HJ, Park SY, Lee HY, et al. Ultra-low-dose chest CT in patients with neutropenic fever and hematologic malignancy: image quality and its diagnostic performance. Cancer Res Treat. 2014;46:393–402.
    1. Gordic S, Morsbach F, Schmidt B, et al. Ultralow-dose chest computed tomography for pulmonary nodule detection: first performance evaluation of single energy scanning with spectral shaping. Invest Radiol. 2014;49:465–473.
    1. Huber A, Landau J, Ebner L, et al. Performance of ultralow-dose CT with iterative reconstruction in lung cancer screening: limiting radiation exposure to the equivalent of conventional chest x-ray imaging. Eur Radiol. 2016;26:3643–3652.
    1. Kim Y, Kim YK, Lee BE, et al. Ultra-low-dose CT of the thorax using iterative reconstruction: evaluation of image quality and radiation dose reduction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:1197–1202.
    1. Martini K, Barth BK, Nguyen-Kim TD, et al. Evaluation of pulmonary nodules and infection on chest CT with radiation dose equivalent to chest radiography: prospective intra-individual comparison study to standard dose CT. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:360–365.
    1. Sui X, Meinel FG, Song W, et al. Detection and size measurements of pulmonary nodules in ultra-low-dose CT with iterative reconstruction compared to low dose CT. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:564–570.
    1. Schaal M, Severac F, Labani A, et al. Diagnostic performance of ultra-low-dose computed tomography for detecting asbestos-related pleuropulmonary diseases: prospective study in a screening setting. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0168979.
    1. Messerli M, Kluckert T, Knitel M, et al. Ultralow dose CT for pulmonary nodule detection with chest x-ray equivalent dose—a prospective intra-individual comparative study. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:3290–3299.
    1. Joemai RM, Veldkamp WJ, Kroft LJ, et al. Adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D versus filtered back projection in CT: evaluation of image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201:1291–1297.
    1. Geyer LL, Schoepf UJ, Meniel FG, et al. State of the art: iterative CT reconstruction techniques. Radiology. 2015;276:339–357.
    1. Willemink MJ, Noël PB. The evolution of image reconstruction for CT-from filtered back projection to artificial intelligence. Eur Radiol. 2018. [Epub ahead of print].
    1. Hart D, Jones DG, Wall BF. Estimation of effective dose in diagnostic radiology from entrance surface dose and dose-area product measurements (NRPB-R—262). National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton, UK, 1994.
    1. Deak PD, Smal Y, Kalender WA. Multisection CT protocols: sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective doses from dose-length product. Radiology. 2010;257:158–166.
    1. Samei E, Badano A, Chakraborty D, et al. Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems; executive summary of AAPM TG18 report. Med Phys. 2005;32:1205–1225.
    1. Kanal KM, Butler PF, Sengupta DS, et al. Diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for 10 adult CT examinations. Radiology. 2017;284:120–133.
    1. Gevenois PA, Tack D.Tack D, Kalra MK, Gevenois PA. Dose reduction and optimization in computed tomography of the chest. Radiation Dose From Multidetector CT, 2nd ed Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2012:307–315.
    1. Noel PB, Renger B, Fiebich M, et al. Does iterative reconstruction lower CT radiation dose: evaluation of 15,000 examinations. PLoS One. 2013;8:e81141.
    1. Macri F, Greffier J, Pereira F, et al. Value of ultra-low-dose chest CT with iterative reconstruction for selected emergency room patients with acute dyspnea. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:1637–1644.
    1. Hanna WC, Paul NS, Darling GE, et al. Minimal-dose computed tomography is superior to chest x-ray for the follow-up and treatment of patients with resected lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;147:30–33.
    1. Lee SW, Kim Y, Shim SS, et al. Image quality assessment of ultra low-dose chest CT using sonogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction. Eur Radiol. 2014;24:817–826.
    1. ICRP. Radiological protection in biomedical research (vol. 22). ICRP Publication no. 62. Annals of ICRP, 1992. Available at: .
    1. Kaplan RM.Sloan F. Utility assessment for estimating quality-adjusted life years. Valuing Health Care: Costs, Benefits, and Effectiveness of Pharmaceuticals and Other Medical Technologies. Boston, MA: Cambridge University Press; 1995:31–60.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit