Previously, we showed that a CT window and level setting of 1,600 and -300 Hounsfield units, respectively, and autocontouring using an 18F-FDG PET 50% intensity level correlated best with pa'/> Autocontouring and Manual Contouring: Which Is the Better Method for Target Delineation Using 18F-FDG PET/CT in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer?
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Nuclear Medicine >Autocontouring and Manual Contouring: Which Is the Better Method for Target Delineation Using 18F-FDG PET/CT in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer?
【24h】

Autocontouring and Manual Contouring: Which Is the Better Method for Target Delineation Using 18F-FDG PET/CT in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer?

机译:自动轮廓和手动轮廓:在非小细胞肺癌中使用18F-FDG PET / CT进行靶标勾画的更好方法是哪一种?

获取原文
           

摘要

id="p-1">Previously, we showed that a CT window and level setting of 1,600 and -300 Hounsfield units, respectively, and autocontouring using an 18F-FDG PET 50% intensity level correlated best with pathologic results. The aim of this study was to compare this autocontouring with manual contouring, to determine which method is better. >Methods: Seventeen patients with non-small cell lung cancer underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT before surgery. The maximum diameter on pathologic examination was determined. Seven sets of gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were defined. The first set (GTVCT) was contoured manually using only CT information. The second set (GTVAuto) was autocontoured using a 50% intensity level for 18F-FDG PET images. The third set (GTVManual) was manually contoured using a visual method on PET images. The other 4 sets combined CT and 18F-FDG PET images fused to one another to become composite volumes: GTVCT+Auto, GTVCT+Manual, GTVCTa?’Auto, and GTVCT-Manual. To quantitate the degree to which CT and 18F-FDG PET defined the same region of interest, a matching index was calculated for each case. The maximum diameter of GTV was compared with the maximum diameter on pathologic examination. >Results: The median GTVCT, GTVAuto, GTVManual, GTVCT+Auto, GTVCT+Manual, GTVCT-Auto, and GTVCT-Manual were 6.96, 2.42, 4.37, 7.46, 10.17, 2.21, and 3.38 cm3, respectively. The median matching indexes of GTVCT versus GTVCT+Auto, GTVAuto versus GTVCT+Auto, GTVCT versus GTVCT+Manual, and GTVManual versus GTVCT+Manual were 0.86, 0.65, 0.88, and 0.81, respectively. Compared with the maximum diameter on pathologic examination, the correlations of GTVCT, GTVAuto, GTVManual, GTVCT+Auto, and GTVCT+Manual were 0.87, 0.83, 0.93, 0.86, and 0.94, respectively. >Conclusion: The matching index was higher for manual contouring than for autocontouring using a 50% intensity level on 18F-FDG PET images. When using a 50% intensity level to contour the target of non-small cell lung cancer, one should also consider using manual contouring of 18F-FDG PET to check for any missed disease.
机译:id =“ p-1”>之前,我们显示了CT窗口和水平设置分别为1,600和-300 Hounsfield单位,并使用50%强度的 18 F-FDG PET自动轮廓水平与病理结果最相关。这项研究的目的是将这种自动轮廓与手动轮廓进行比较,以确定哪种方法更好。 >方法:术前对17例非小细胞肺癌患者进行了 18 F-FDG PET / CT。确定了病理检查的最大直径。定义了七组总肿瘤体积(GTV)。仅使用CT信息手动绘制了第一组(GTV CT )的轮廓。使用50%强度水平对第二张图像(GTV Auto )进行自动轮廓处理,以用于 18 F-FDG PET图像。第三组(GTV Manual )是使用视觉方法在PET图像上手动绘制轮廓的。其他4组组合的CT和 18 F-FDG PET图像相互融合以形成合成体积:GTV CT + Auto ,GTV CT + Manual ,GTV CTa?'Auto 和GTV CT-Manual 。为了量化CT和 18 F-FDG PET定义相同关注区域的程度,针对每种情况计算了匹配指数。将GTV的最大直径与病理检查中的最大直径进行比较。 >结果:中值GTV CT ,GTV Auto ,GTV Manual ,GTV CT + Auto ,GTV CT + Manual ,GTV CT-Auto 和GTV CT-Manual 分别为6.96、2.42、4.37、7.46、10.17, 2.21和3.38 cm 3 。 GTV CT 与GTV CT + Auto ,GTV Auto 与GTV CT + Auto ,GTV的中值匹配指数 CT 与GTV CT + Manual 和GTV Manual 与GTV CT + Manual 分别为0.86、0.65、0.88,和0.81分别。与病理检查最大直径相比,GTV CT ,GTV Auto ,GTV Manual ,GTV CT + Auto < / sub>和GTV CT + Manual 分别为0.87、0.83、0.93、0.86和0.94。 >结论:对于在 18 F-FDG PET图像上使用50%强度级别进行手动轮廓绘制时,匹配指数要比在自动轮廓绘制时更高。当使用50%的强度水平勾画非小细胞肺癌的目标轮廓时,还应该考虑使用 18 F-FDG PET的轮廓勾画轮廓来检查是否遗漏了任何疾病。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号