Accuracy and Reproducibility of a Software Prototype for Semi-Automated Computer-Aided Volumetry of the solid and subsolid Components of part-solid Pulmonary Nodules

Abstract

To test the accuracy and reproducibility of a software prototype for semi-automated computer-aided volumetry (CAV) of part-solid pulmonary nodules (PSN) with separate segmentation of the solid part. 66 PSNs were retrospectively identified in 34 thin-slice unenhanced chest CTs of 19 patients. CAV was performed by two medical students. Manual volumetry (MV) was carried out by two radiology residents. The reference standard was determined by an experienced radiologist in consensus with one of the residents. Visual assessment of CAV accuracy was performed. Measurement variability between CAV/MV and the reference standard as a measure of accuracy, CAV inter- and intra-rater variability as well as CAV intrascan variability between two recontruction kernels was determined via the Bland-Altman method and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Subjectively assessed accuracy of CAV/MV was 77 %/79 %-80 % for the solid part and 67 %/73 %-76 % for the entire nodule. Measurement variability between CAV and the reference standard ranged from -151-117 % for the solid part and -106-54 % for the entire nodule. Interrater variability was -16-16 % for the solid part (ICC 0.998) and -102-65 % for the entire nodule (ICC 0.880). Intra-rater variability was -70-49 % for the solid part (ICC 0.992) and -111-31 % for the entire nodule (ICC 0.929). Intrascan variability between the smooth and the sharp reconstruction kernel was -45-39 % for the solid part and -21-46 % for the entire nodule. Although the software prototype delivered satisfactory results when segmentation is evaluated subjectively, quantitative statistical analysis revealed room for improvement especially regarding the segmentation accuracy of the solid part and the reproducibility of measurements of the nodule's subsolid margins. · Assessed visually CAV delivers similar accuracy compared to manual volumetry. · Accuracy of CAV was higher for the entire nodule. · Reproducibility was better for the solid part. · Variability between the kernels was higher for the solid part.