Search

Objectives: To compare the diagnostic performance of digital tomosynthesis (DTS) and chest radiography for detecting airway abnormalities, using computed tomography (CT) as a reference.Materials and Methods: We evaluated 161 data sets from 149 patients (91 with and 70 without airway abnormalities) who had undergone radiography, DTS, and CT to detect airway problems. Radiographs and DTS were evaluated to localize and score the severity of the airway abnormalities, and to score the image quality using CT as a reference. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC), McNemar's test, weighted kappa, and the paired t-test were used for statistical analysis.Results: The sensitivity of DTS was higher (reader 1, 93.51 %; reader 2, 94.29 %) than chest radiography (68.83 %; 71.43 %) in detecting airway lesions. The diagnostic accuracy of DTS (90.91 %; 94.70 %) was also significantly better than that of radiography (78.03 %; 82.58 %, all p < 0.05). DTS image quality was significantly better than chest radiography (1.83, 2.74; p < 0.05) in the results of both readers. The inter-observer agreement with respect to DTS findings was moderate and superior when compared to radiography findings.Conclusions: DTS is a more accurate and sensitive modality than radiography for detecting airway lesions that are easily obscured by soft tissue structures in the mediastinum.Key Points: • Digital tomosynthesis offers new diagnostic options for airway lesions. • Digital tomosynthesis is more sensitive and accurate than radiography for airway lesions. • Digital tomosynthesis shows better image quality than radiography. • Assessment of lesion severity, via tomosynthesis is comparable to computed tomography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the actual diagnostic impact of digital tomosynthesis (DTS) in oncologic patients with suspected pulmonary lesions on chest radiography (CXR).Methods: A total of 237 patients (135 male, 102 female; age, 70.8 ± 10.4 years) with a known primary malignancy and suspected pulmonary lesion(s) on CXR and who underwent DTS were retrospectively identified. Two radiologists (experience, 10 and 15 years) analysed in consensus CXR and DTS images and proposed a diagnosis according to a confidence score: 1 or 2 = definitely or probably benign pulmonary or extrapulmonary lesion, or pseudolesion; 3 = indeterminate; 4 or 5 = probably or definitely pulmonary lesion. DTS findings were proven by CT (n = 114 patients), CXR during follow-up (n = 105) or histology (n = 18).Results: Final diagnoses included 77 pulmonary opacities, 26 pulmonary scars, 12 pleural lesions and 122 pulmonary pseudolesions. DTS vs CXR presented a higher (P < 0.05) sensitivity (92 vs 15 %), specificity (91 vs 9 %), overall accuracy (92 vs 12 %), and diagnostic confidence (area under ROC, 0.997 vs 0.619). Mean effective dose of CXR vs DTS was 0.06 vs 0.107 mSv (P < 0.05).Conclusions: DTS improved diagnostic accuracy and confidence in comparison to CXR alone in oncologic patients with suspected pulmonary lesions on CXR with only a slight, though significant, increase in radiation dose.Key Points: • Digital tomosynthesis (DTS) improves accuracy of chest radiography (CXR) in oncologic patients. • DTS improves confidence of CXR in oncologic patients. • DTS allowed avoidance of CT in about 50 % of oncologic patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of chest radiography (CXR), chest digital tomosynthesis (DT) and low dose multidetector computed tomography (LDCT) for the detection of small pulmonary ground-glass opacity (GGO) nodules, using an anthropomorphic chest phantom. Methods: Artificial pulmonary nodules were placed in a phantom and a total of 40 samples of different nodule settings underwent CXR, DT and LDCT. The images were randomly read by three experienced chest radiologists. Free-response receiver-operating characteristics (FROC) were used. Results: The figures of merit for the FROC curves averaged for the three observers were 0.41, 0.37 and 0.76 for CXR, DT and LDCT, respectively. FROC analyses revealed significantly better performance of LDCT over CXR or DT for the detection of GGO nodules ( P < 0.05). The difference in detectability between CXR and DT was not statistically significant ( P = 0.73). Conclusion: The diagnostic performance of DT for the detection of pulmonary small GGO nodules was not significantly different from that of CXR, but LDCT performed significantly better than both CXR and DT. DT is not a suitable alternative to CT for small GGO nodule detection, and LDCT remains the method of choice for this purpose. Key Points: • For GGO nodule detection, DT was not significantly different from CXR. • DT is not a suitable alternative to CT for GGO nodule detection. • LDCT is the method of choice for GGO nodule detection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]