Variability in Mediastinal Lymph Node Measurements in Chest Contrast-enhanced CT: Time to Change the Paradigm?

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Alon Olesinksi, Richard Lederman, Yusef Azraq, Leo Joskowicz, Jacob Sosna
{"title":"Variability in Mediastinal Lymph Node Measurements in Chest Contrast-enhanced CT: Time to Change the Paradigm?","authors":"Alon Olesinksi, Richard Lederman, Yusef Azraq, Leo Joskowicz, Jacob Sosna","doi":"10.1097/RTI.0000000000000859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Measurement of mediastinal lymph nodes (LNs) is an integral part of patient assessment, and is performed by manually measuring the short axis length (SAL) of the LNs on axial slices. LNs with SAL ≥10 mm are considered pathologically enlarged. We aimed to quantify the interobserver agreement and variability of SAL measurements, compare them to automatically computed SALs from manual LN delineations, and establish the mean SAL measurement error.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Two radiologists independently measured the SALs of 451 LNs in 40 contrast-enhanced chest CT (CECT) scans. One of them also manually delineated the LN contours in each CECT slice, and this served to automatically classify LN as normal/enlarged based on their SALs. Differences between SAL measurements and Bland-Altman statistics were computed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The normal/enlarged LN overall agreement (371 normal, 52 enlarged) between both radiologists was 93.8% (423/451). For agreement/disagreement, the SAL differences were 1.1 (1.0) mm (17%) and 3.5 (3.2) mm (40%). The disagreement differences were nearly twice as large as the agreement differences. The agreement between the manual and the computed SALs for both radiologists was 92.7% (418/451), similar to the interobserver variability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Classification of mediastinal lymph nodes based on SAL measurements demonstrates high agreement. It indicates that SAL measurements automatically computed from manual LN delineations could be a reliable and time-saving tool. In cases of disagreement, the ±2 mm error supports the use of 3 size categories: normal (<8 mm), possibly enlarged (8 to 12 mm), and definitely enlarged (>12 mm).</p>","PeriodicalId":49974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Thoracic Imaging","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Thoracic Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RTI.0000000000000859","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Measurement of mediastinal lymph nodes (LNs) is an integral part of patient assessment, and is performed by manually measuring the short axis length (SAL) of the LNs on axial slices. LNs with SAL ≥10 mm are considered pathologically enlarged. We aimed to quantify the interobserver agreement and variability of SAL measurements, compare them to automatically computed SALs from manual LN delineations, and establish the mean SAL measurement error.

Materials and methods: Two radiologists independently measured the SALs of 451 LNs in 40 contrast-enhanced chest CT (CECT) scans. One of them also manually delineated the LN contours in each CECT slice, and this served to automatically classify LN as normal/enlarged based on their SALs. Differences between SAL measurements and Bland-Altman statistics were computed.

Results: The normal/enlarged LN overall agreement (371 normal, 52 enlarged) between both radiologists was 93.8% (423/451). For agreement/disagreement, the SAL differences were 1.1 (1.0) mm (17%) and 3.5 (3.2) mm (40%). The disagreement differences were nearly twice as large as the agreement differences. The agreement between the manual and the computed SALs for both radiologists was 92.7% (418/451), similar to the interobserver variability.

Conclusion: Classification of mediastinal lymph nodes based on SAL measurements demonstrates high agreement. It indicates that SAL measurements automatically computed from manual LN delineations could be a reliable and time-saving tool. In cases of disagreement, the ±2 mm error supports the use of 3 size categories: normal (<8 mm), possibly enlarged (8 to 12 mm), and definitely enlarged (>12 mm).

胸部增强CT纵膈淋巴结测量的变异性:是时候改变模式了?
目的:纵隔淋巴结(LNs)的测量是患者评估的一个组成部分,通过在轴向切片上手动测量LNs的短轴长(SAL)来完成。SAL≥10 mm的LNs被认为是病理性放大。我们的目的是量化SAL测量的观察者间一致性和可变性,将它们与人工LN划定自动计算的SAL进行比较,并建立平均SAL测量误差。材料和方法:两名放射科医生独立测量了40次胸部增强CT (CECT)扫描中451个LNs的SALs。其中一人还在每个CECT切片中手动勾画LN轮廓,这有助于根据SALs自动将LN分类为正常/放大。计算SAL测量值与Bland-Altman统计值之间的差异。结果:两名放射科医师对LN正常/肿大的总体一致性(371例正常,52例肿大)为93.8%(423/451)。对于同意/不同意,SAL差异为1.1 (1.0)mm(17%)和3.5 (3.2)mm(40%)。意见分歧几乎是意见一致分歧的两倍。两位放射科医生的手册和计算的SALs之间的一致性为92.7%(418/451),与观察者之间的可变性相似。结论:基于SAL测量的纵隔淋巴结分类具有高度的一致性。这表明,从人工LN圈定中自动计算的SAL测量值可能是一种可靠且节省时间的工具。在不一致的情况下,±2mm的误差支持使用3种尺寸类别:正常(12mm)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Thoracic Imaging
Journal of Thoracic Imaging 医学-核医学
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Thoracic Imaging (JTI) provides authoritative information on all aspects of the use of imaging techniques in the diagnosis of cardiac and pulmonary diseases. Original articles and analytical reviews published in this timely journal provide the very latest thinking of leading experts concerning the use of chest radiography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, ultrasound, and all other promising imaging techniques in cardiopulmonary radiology. Official Journal of the Society of Thoracic Radiology: Japanese Society of Thoracic Radiology Korean Society of Thoracic Radiology European Society of Thoracic Imaging.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书