Comparison of 2D and 3D lung lobe quantification with Ventilation/Perfusion Ratio.

In this study, standard 2D lung lobe quantification is compared with two 3D lung lobe quantification software tools to investigate the clinical benefit of a 3D approach. The accuracy of 2D versus 3D lung lobe quantification is evaluated based on the calculated numerical ventilation-perfusion ratio (VQR) using a receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis.A study group of 50 consecutive patients underwent a planar lung scintigraphy (anterior/posterior) as well as ventilation/perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT/CT) to exclude acute pulmonary embolism. All data were acquired with SPECT OPTIMA NM/CT 640 (GE Healthcare). 2D analysis was performed for all ventilation/perfusion scans using a lung analysis tool (Syngo Workstation, Siemens Healthineers). 3D quantification analysis was performed using QLUNG (Q. Lung, Xeleris 4.0, GE Healthcare) and LLQ (Hermes Hybrid 3D Lung Lobar Quantification, Hermes Medical Solutions). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) served as a decision criterion to find the best agreement between clinical PE findings and calculated PE candidates of the 2D and 3D methods. The significance of the ROC curves was evaluated using the DeLong comparison.A significant difference between 2D/3D could be determined. Both 3D approaches showed robust and comparable results. The AUC range of [0.10, 0.67] was given for 2D lobar analysis, QLUNG AUC range revealed in [0.39,0.74] and LLQ AUC range was [0.42,0.72]. Averaged over all lung lobes an AUC=0.39 was given for 2D analysis and AUC=0.58 was given for LLQ/QLUNG.We could demonstrate the better performance of 3D analysis compared to 2D analysis. Consequently, is recommended to use a 3D approach in clinical practice.