Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Kawahara-cho, Shogoin, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Preemptive Medicine and Lifestyle-related Disease Research Center, Kyoto University Hospital, 53 Kawahara-cho, Shogoin, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Eur Radiol. 2019 Oct;29(10):5673-5681. doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06107-w. Epub 2019 Mar 19.
To compare observer performance of detecting bone metastases between bone scintigraphy, including planar scan and single-photon emission computed tomography, and computed tomography (CT) temporal subtraction (TS).
Data on 60 patients with cancer who had undergone CT (previous and current) and bone scintigraphy were collected. Previous CT images were registered to the current ones by large deformation diffeomorphic metric mapping; the registered previous images were subtracted from the current ones to produce TS. Definitive diagnosis of bone metastases was determined by consensus between two radiologists. Twelve readers independently interpreted the following pairs of examinations: NM-pair, previous and current CTs and bone scintigraphy, and TS-pair, previous and current CTs and TS. The readers assigned likelihood levels to suspected bone metastases for diagnosis. Sensitivity, number of false positives per patient (FPP), and reading time for each pair of examinations were analysed for evaluating observer performance by performing the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Figure-of-merit (FOM) was calculated using jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis.
The sensitivity of TS was significantly higher than that of bone scintigraphy (54.3% vs. 41.3%, p = 0.006). FPP with TS was significantly higher than that with bone scintigraphy (0.189 vs. 0.0722, p = 0.003). FOM of TS tended to be better than that of bone scintigraphy (0.742 vs. 0.691, p = 0.070).
Sensitivity of TS in detecting bone metastasis was significantly higher than that of bone scintigraphy, but still limited to 54%. TS might be superior to bone scintigraphy for early detection of bone metastasis.
• Computed tomography temporal subtraction was helpful in early detection of bone metastases. • Sensitivity for bone metastasis was higher for computed tomography temporal subtraction than for bone scintigraphy. • Figure-of-merit of computed tomography temporal subtraction was better than that of bone scintigraphy.
比较骨闪烁扫描(包括平面扫描和单光子发射计算机断层扫描)和计算机断层扫描(CT)时间减影(TS)在检测骨转移中的观察者性能。
收集了 60 例接受过 CT(既往和当前)和骨闪烁扫描的癌症患者的数据。通过大变形仿射度量映射将既往 CT 图像注册到当前 CT 图像上;将注册后的既往图像从当前图像中减去,得到 TS。通过两位放射科医生的共识确定骨转移的明确诊断。12 位读者独立解读以下两对检查:NM 对,既往和当前 CT 和骨闪烁扫描;以及 TS 对,既往和当前 CT 和 TS。读者为可疑骨转移分配诊断可能性水平。通过执行 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验,分析每对检查的敏感性、每位患者的假阳性数(FPP)和阅读时间,以评估观察者的表现。使用刀切替代自由响应接受者操作特征分析计算功效系数(FOM)。
TS 的敏感性明显高于骨闪烁扫描(54.3%比 41.3%,p=0.006)。TS 的 FPP 明显高于骨闪烁扫描(0.189 比 0.0722,p=0.003)。TS 的 FOM 倾向于优于骨闪烁扫描(0.742 比 0.691,p=0.070)。
TS 在检测骨转移中的敏感性明显高于骨闪烁扫描,但仍限于 54%。TS 可能优于骨闪烁扫描,有助于早期发现骨转移。
CT 时间减影有助于早期发现骨转移。
骨转移的敏感性在 CT 时间减影中比在骨闪烁扫描中更高。
CT 时间减影的功效系数优于骨闪烁扫描。