Computed Tomographic Volumetric Calculation Reproducibility

Staron, Ronald B.; Ford, Edith

doi:10.1097/00004424-198603000-00013

Cited by 28 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Staron and Ford (16) found that repeated measurements of cross-sectional area by a single observer varied by about Ϯ5% to Ϯ20%, depending on the size of the object. Likewise, Winer-Muram et al (13) reported that the within-observer error seen with different volume-estimating methods increased as tumor size decreased.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Two-dimensional CT Measurements of Small Noncalcified Pulmonary Nodules Reliable?

Revel¹,

Bissery²,

Bienvenu³

et al. 2004

Radiology

321

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Two-dimensional CT Measurements of Small Noncalcified Pulmonary Nodules Reliable?

Revel¹,

Bissery²,

Bienvenu³

et al. 2004

Radiology

321

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Image window width and level were set at 80 and 25 HU, respectively, for ROI determination [1]. Each of the slice areas were summed and multiplied by slice thickness (mm) to yield the renal volume (mL) [14,25]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of glomerular filtration rate with dynamic computed tomography in normal Beagle dogs

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of our study was to determine individual and global glomerular filtration rates (GFRs) using dynamic renal computed tomography (CT) in Beagle dogs. Twenty-four healthy Beagle dogs were included in the experiment. Anesthesia was induced in all dogs by using propofol and isoflurane prior to CT examination. A single slice of the kidney was sequentially scanned after a bolus intravenous injection of contrast material (iohexol, 1 mL/kg, 300 mgI/mL). Time attenuation curves were created and contrast clearance per unit volume was calculated using a Patlak plot analysis. The CT-GFR was then determined based on the conversion of contrast clearance per unit volume to contrast clearance per body weight. At the renal hilum, CT-GFR values per unit renal volume (mL/min/mL) of the right and left kidneys were 0.69 ± 0.04 and 0.57 ± 0.05, respectively. No significant differences were found between the weight-adjusted CT-GFRs in either kidney at the same renal hilum (p = 0.747). The average global GFR was 4.21 ± 0.25 mL/min/kg and the whole kidney GFR was 33.43 ± 9.20 mL/min. CT-GFR techniques could be a practical way to separately measure GFR in each kidney for clinical and research purposes.

show abstract

“…Manual volume measurement is cumbersome, however, and automated measurement systems are not yet readily available. The most widely used manual method is the “summation of areas” technique 6–11. James et al12 recently advocated a unidimensional approach to reporting tumor size based on the assumption that tumors are roughly spherical.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tumor size on computed tomography scans

Dachman

MacEneaney

Adedipe

et al. 2001

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Bidimensional tumor measurements are used routinely as surrogates for tumor volume. The purpose this study was to determine whether there is any added benefit in bidimensional or tridimensional measurements over a unidimensional measurement. METHODS Sixty‐nine colorectal hepatic metastases on 19 computed tomography scans (1–8 lesions per scan) from 9 patients were analyzed. Five patients contributed 2–4 scans each (mean, 3 scans). The standard volume of these lesions was determined by the “summation of areas” technique. The maximum axial dimension, the product of the greatest axial dimensions, and several volume estimates (based on the volumes of a sphere, an ellipsoid, and a cube) each were correlated with the standard volume. RESULTS The maximum axial dimension and the product of the greatest axial dimensions correlated equally with tumor volume (correlation coefficient = 0.93). Surrogate measures based on the equations for a sphere and an ellipsoid underestimated tumor volume, whereas the equation for a cube overestimated volume. CONCLUSIONS When reporting tumor size, there is no significant added benefit in reporting bidimensional or tridimensional measurements over the maximum axial dimension. Cancer 2001;91:555–60. © 2001 American Cancer Society.

show abstract

Computed Tomographic Volumetric Calculation Reproducibility

Cited by 28 publications

References 0 publications

Are Two-dimensional CT Measurements of Small Noncalcified Pulmonary Nodules Reliable?

Are Two-dimensional CT Measurements of Small Noncalcified Pulmonary Nodules Reliable?

Assessment of glomerular filtration rate with dynamic computed tomography in normal Beagle dogs

Tumor size on computed tomography scans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About