Skip to main content
Log in

Automated lobar quantification of emphysema in patients with severe COPD

  • Chest
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Automated lobar quantification of emphysema has not yet been evaluated. Unenhanced 64-slice MDCT was performed in 47 patients evaluated before bronchoscopic lung-volume reduction. CT images reconstructed with a standard (B20) and high-frequency (B50) kernel were analyzed using a dedicated prototype software (MevisPULMO) allowing lobar quantification of emphysema extent. Lobar quantification was obtained following (a) a fully automatic delineation of the lobar limits by the software and (b) a semiautomatic delineation with manual correction of the lobar limits when necessary and was compared with the visual scoring of emphysema severity per lobe. No statistically significant difference existed between automated and semiautomated lobar quantification (p > 0.05 in the five lobes), with differences ranging from 0.4 to 3.9%. The agreement between the two methods (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC) was excellent for left upper lobe (ICC = 0.94), left lower lobe (ICC = 0.98), and right lower lobe (ICC = 0.80). The agreement was good for right upper lobe (ICC = 0.68) and moderate for middle lobe (IC = 0.53). The Bland and Altman plots confirmed these results. A good agreement was observed between the software and visually assessed lobar predominance of emphysema (kappa 0.78; 95% CI 0.64–0.92). Automated and semiautomated lobar quantifications of emphysema are concordant and show good agreement with visual scoring.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization (2000) World health report. World Health Organization, Geneva. Available from http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/index.html. Accessed 26 May 2008

  2. Pauwels RA, Buist AS, Calverley PM, Jenkins CR, Hurd SS, GOLD Scientific Committee (2001) Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. NHLBI/WHO global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease (GOLD) workshop summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 163:1256–1276

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Meyers BF, Patterson GA (2003) Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 10: bullectomy, lung volume reduction surgery, and transplantation for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 58:634–638

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Slone RM, Pilgram TK, Gierada DS, Sagel SS, Glazer HS, Yusen RD et al (1997) Lung volume reduction surgery: comparison of preoperative radiologic features and clinical outcome. Radiology 204:685–693

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Weder W, Thurnheer R, Stammberger U, Burge M, Russi EW, Bloch KE (1997) Radiologic emphysema morphology is associated with outcome after surgical lung volume reduction. Ann Thorac Surg 64:313–320

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wisser W, Klepetko W, Kontrus M, Bankier A, Senbaklavaci O, Kaider A et al (1998) Morphologic grading of the emphysematous lung and its relation to improvement after lung volume reduction surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 65:793–799

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hamacher J, Bloch KE, Stammberger UZ, Shmid RA, Laube I, Russi EW et al (1999) Two years’ outcome of lung volume reduction surgery in different morphologic emphysema types. Ann Thorac Surg 68:1792–1798

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Thurnheer R, Engel H, Weder W, Stammberger UZ, Laube I, Russi EW et al (1999) Role of lung perfusion scintigraphy in relation to chest computed tomography and pulmonary function in the evaluation of candidates for lung volume reduction surgery. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 159:301–310

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. National Emphysema Treatment Trial Research Group (2001) Patients at high risk of death after lung-volume-reduction surgery. N Engl J Med 345(15):1075–1083, Oct 11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fishman A, Martinez F, Naunheim K, Piantadosi S, Wise R, Ries A, Weinmann G, Wood DE, National Emphysema Treatment Trial Research Group (2003) A randomized trial comparing lung-volume-reduction surgery with medical therapy for severe emphysema. N Engl J Med 348(21):2059–2073, May 22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Leroy S, Marquette CH (2004) VENT: international study of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction as a palliative treatment for emphysema. Rev Mal Respir 21:1144–1152

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Strange C, Herth FJ, Kovitz KL, McLennan G, Ernst A, Goldin J, Noppen M, Criner GJ, Sciurba FC, VENT Study Group (2007) Design of the endobronchial valve for emphysema palliation trial (VENT): a non-surgical method of lung volume reduction. BMC Pulm Med 7:10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Muller NL, Staples CA, Miller RR, Abboud RT (1988) “Density mask”. An objective method to quantitate emphysema using computed tomography. Chest 94:782–787

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kinsella M, Müller NL, Abboud RT, Morrison NJ, DyBuncio A (1990) Quantitation of emphysema by computed tomography using a “density mask” program and correlation with pulmonary function tests. Chest 97:315–321

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Archer DC, Coblentz CL, deKemp RA, Nahmias C, Norman G (1993) Automated in vivo quantification of emphysema. Radiology 188:835–838

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gevenois PA, De Vuyst P, de Maertelaer V, Zanen J, Jacobovitz D, Cosio MG et al (1996) Comparison of computed density and microscopic morphometry in pulmonary emphysema. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 154:187–192

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bae KT, Slone RM, Gierada DS, Yusen RD, Cooper JD (1997) Patients with emphysema: quantitative CT analysis before and after lung volume reduction surgery. Work in progress. Radiology 203:705–714

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bankier AA, De Maertelaer V, Keyzer C, Gevenois PA (1999) Pulmonary emphysema: subjective visual grading vs objective quantification with macroscopic morphometry and thin-section CT densitometry. Radiology 211:851–858

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Madani A, De Maertelaer V, Zanen J, Gevenois PA (2007) Pulmonary emphysema: radiation dose and section thickness at multidetector CT quantification–comparison with macroscopic and microscopic morphometry. Radiology 243:250–257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gietema HA, Schilham AM, van Ginneken B, van Klaveren RJ, Lammers JW, Prokop M (2007) Monitoring of smoking-induced emphysema with CT in a lung cancer screening setting: detection of real increase in extent of emphysema. Radiology 244:890–897

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bergin C, Muller N, Nichols DM, Lillington G, Hogg JC, Mullen B et al (1986) The diagnosis of emphysema. A computed tomographic-pathologic correlation. Am Rev Respir Dis 133:541–546

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Park KJ, Bergin CJ, Clausen JL (1999) Quantitation of emphysema with three-dimensional CT densitometry: comparison with two-dimensional analysis, visual emphysema scores, and pulmonary function test results. Radiology 211:541–547

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Gierada DS, Yusen RD, Pilgram TK, Crouch L, Slone RM, Bae KT et al (2001) Repeatability of quantitative CT indexes of emphysema in patients evaluated for lung volume reduction surgery. Radiology 220:448–454

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Desai SR, Hansell DM, Walker A, MacDonald SL, Chabat F, Wells AU (2007) Quantification of emphysema: a composite physiologic index derived from CT estimation of disease extent. Eur Radiol 17:911–918

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cederlund K, Tylén U, Jorfeldt L, Aspelin P (2002) Classification of emphysema in candidates for lung volume reduction surgery: a new objective and surgically oriented model for describing CT severity and heterogeneity. Chest 122:590–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gierada DS, Glazer HS, Slone RM (1997) Pseudomass due to atelectasis in patients with severe bullous emphysema. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:85–92

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martine Remy-Jardin.

Additional information

No financial support to disclose. A potential conflict of interest is noted in that one author is an employee of Siemens.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Revel, MP., Faivre, JB., Remy-Jardin, M. et al. Automated lobar quantification of emphysema in patients with severe COPD. Eur Radiol 18, 2723–2730 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1065-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1065-z

Keywords

Navigation