Comparison of  chest radiography, chest tomosynthesis and computed tomography for detection of  pulmonary nodules:  A phantom study: Comparison between CXR, CDT and CT

Kattipathanapong T; Euathrongchit J; Wannasopha Y; Ua-Apisitwong S; Jirapong K; Saeteng S; Tantraworasin A; Lertprasertsuke N

Authors

Kattipathanapong T Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai Universit, Thailand
Euathrongchit J Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai Universit, Thailand
Wannasopha Y Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand
Ua-Apisitwong S Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand
Jirapong K Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand
Saeteng S Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand
Tantraworasin A Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai Universit, Thailand
Lertprasertsuke N Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand

Keywords:

chest radiograph, digital tomosynthesis, computed tomography

Abstract

Objective To compare the rate of pulmonary nodule detection using chest radiograph, chest digital tomosynthesis and computed tomography examination.

Methods After institutional review broad approval, an in-house chest phantom was made from acrylic, plaster and catheters. Plastic beads of 1-2 mm, 3-4 mm, 5-6 mm, 7-8 mm and 9-10 mm were implanted in the phantom to represent pulmonary nodules. From 0 to 20 nodules were randomly embedded in each model and the model was photographed by digital chest radiograph (CXR), chest digital tomosynthesis (CDT) and chest computed tomography (CT). Two blinded thoracic radiologists reviewed and marked the nodules on each of 34 images. The percentage of nodules detected with each method was calculated and compared.

Results There were a total of 332 nodules in the 34 phantom models. Overall nodule detection rates were 75.3% for CXR, 91.0% for CDT and 98.8% for CT. With CT, all nodules larger than 3 mm in diameter were identified. With CDT, over 90% of the nodules larger than 5 mm were detected. The percentage detected with CDT and CT was not statistically significantly different for 5-10 mm nodules. The regions of poorest nodular detection with CXR were the mediastinum and hilum regions, while with CDT it was the costophrenic sulcus.

Conclusion CT provides the highest percentage of nodular detection, followed by CDT and digital CXR in that order. There is no significant difference in percentage detection between CT and CDT for 5-10 mm nodules.

References

1. Geitung JT, Skjaerstad LM, Gothlin JH. Clinical utility of chest roentgenograms. Eur Radiol. 1999;9:721-3.
2. Bath M, Hakansson M, Borjesson S, Hoeschen C, Tischenko O, Kheddache S, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: effect of anatomical noise. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114:109-13.
3. Hakansson M, Bath M, Borjesson S, Kheddache S, Grahn A, Ruschin M, et al. Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: summary of the RADIUS chest trial. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114:114-20.
4. Kaneko M, Eguchi K, Ohmatsu H, Kakinuma R, Naruke T, Suemasu K, et al. Peripheral lung cancer: screening and detection with low-dose spiral CT versus radiography. Radiology. 1996;201:798-802.
5. Mayo JR, Aldrich J, Muller NL. Radiation exposure at chest CT: a statement of the Fleischner Society. Radiology. 2003;228:15-21.
6. Stabin MG. Doses from Medical Radiation Sources. [online]. Available at: hps.org/hpspublications/articles/dosesfrommedicalradiation.html. Accessed January 15, 2011.
7. Dobbins JT, 3rd, Godfrey DJ. Digital x-ray tomosynthesis: current state of the art and clinical potential. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48:65-106.
8. McAdams HP, Samei E, Dobbins J, 3rd, Tourassi GD, Ravin CE. Recent advances in chest radiography. Radiology. 2006;241:663-83.
9. Vikgren J, Zachrisson S, Svalkvist A, Johnsson AA, Boijsen M, Flinck A, et al. Comparison of chest tomosynthesis and chest radiography for detection of pulmonary nodules: human observer study of clinical cases. Radiology. 2008;249:1034-41.
10. ACR. Radiation Exposure in X-ray and CT Examinations. [online]. Available at: www.radiologyinfo.org/en/pdf/sfty_xray.pdf. Accessed February 5, 2011.
11. MacMahon H, Austin JH, Gamsu G, Herold CJ, Jett JR, Naidich DP, et al. Guidelines for management of small pulmonary nodules detected on CT scans: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology. 2005;237:395-400.
12. Triphuridet N, Singharuksa S, Sricharunrat T, Screening of lung cancer by low-dose CT(LDCT), digital tomosynthesis (DT) and chest radiography (CR) in a high risk population: A comparison of detection methods Journal of Thoracic Oncology. 2013 :S148-9.
13. Dobbins JT, 3rd, McAdams HP. Chest tomosynthesis: technical principles and clinical update. Eur J Radiol. 2009 ;72:244-51.
14. Mermuys K, De Geeter F, Bacher K, Van De Moortele K, Coenegrachts K, Steyaert L, et al. Digital tomosynthesis in the detection of urolithiasis: Diagnostic performance and dosimetry compared with digital radiography with MDCT as the reference standard. Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:161-7.