Comparison of accuracy between Picture Archiving and Communication Systems three-dimensional measuring method and Tada formula in intracerebral hemorrhage volume measurement
《中国医学物理学杂志》[ISSN:1005-202X/CN:44-1351/R]
- Issue:
- 2019年第3期
- Page:
- 296-300
- Research Field:
- 医学影像物理
- Publishing date:
Info
- Title:
- Comparison of accuracy between Picture Archiving and Communication Systems three-dimensional measuring method and Tada formula in intracerebral hemorrhage volume measurement
- Author(s):
- ZHANG Qiaoying1; 2; 3; HUANG Xiaoyu1; 2; 3; LIANG Xiaohong1; 2; 3; ZHOU Junlin1; 2; 3
- 1.Department of Radiology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou 730030, China; 2. Second School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China; 3. Key Laboratory of Medical Imaging in Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730030, China
- Keywords:
- ; Keywords: intracerebral hemorrhage volume; Tada formula; PACS three-dimensional measurement; computed tomography
- PACS:
- R743.34；R318
- DOI:
- DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2019.03.010
- Abstract:
- Abstract: Objective To evaluate and compare the accuracies of Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS) three-dimensional measuring method and Tada formula in the measurement of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) volume. Methods A retrospective study was conducted on 165 patients with acute ICH. Thirty-six irregular water phantoms with different shapes and volumes were used in this study. All patients and water phantoms were scanned with conventional CT. Two imaging specialists used both Tada formula and PACS three-dimensional measuring method to measure the volumes of hematoma and water phantoms, independently. The differences and accuracies of the two methods in ICH volume measurement were compared. Based on the hematoma volume measured with PACS three-dimensional measuring method, the hematoma size was divided into 5 grades, namely 0-10.0 mL, 10.1-20.0 mL, 20.1-30.0 mL, 30.1-50.0 mL and >50.1 mL. According to the rule of barras scale, the hematoma shape was divided into 5 levels. The results obtained with the two methods were analyzed and compared from two aspects namely hematoma size and hematoma shape. The measurement accuracies of the two methods were evaluated by comparing the measured phantom volume with the actual phantom volume, and then verified by the comparison of the measured ICH volume in 15 patients treated with minimally invasive surgery and the actual ICH volume. Results When the hematoma volume was larger than 10.0 mL but less than 30.0 mL, no statistical differences were found between the two methods (P>0.05). When the hematoma volume was less than 10.0 mL or larger than 30.0 mL, the difference between the two methods was statistically significant (P<0.05). When the hematoma shape was level 1-3, no statistical differences were found between the two methods (P>0.05). When the hematoma shape was level 4-5, the difference in hematoma volume was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the phantoms volume measured by PACS three-dimensional measuring method and the actual phantom volume (P=0.22). Significant differences were found between the water phantoms volume measured by Tada formula and the actual phantom volume (P=0.01). And the volumes measured by PACS three-dimensional measuring method were closer to the actual phantom volume and the actual ICH volume in 15 patients. Conclusion When the hematoma volume is too small (<10 mL) or too large (>30 mL), there is a large difference in the measurements between the two methods. The more irregular the hematoma is, the larger the different between the two methods is. The volume measured by PACS three-dimensional measuring method is closer to the actual volume.
Last Update: 2019-03-25