TY - JOUR
T1 - Imaging of regional ventilation
T2 - Is CT ventilation imaging the answer? A systematic review of the validation data
AU - Hegi-Johnson, Fiona
AU - de Ruysscher, Dirk
AU - Keall, Paul
AU - Hendriks, Lizza
AU - Vinogradskiy, Yevgeniy
AU - Yamamoto, Tokihiro
AU - Tahir, Bilal
AU - Kipritidis, John
N1 - Funding Information:
Author Keall has a patent US Patent #7668357 issued to Stanford University in relation to this work, and holds NHMRC Australia Funding. Author Hegi-Johnson receives clinical trial funding, and sits on advisory boards for Astra Zeneca outside the submitted work. Author Hendriks reports grants and receives non-financial support from Boehringer Ingelheim , grants and non-financial support from Roche, and non-financial support from BMS, outside the submitted work.
Funding Information:
Peter Mac Foundation, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne Australia provides support for Author Hegi-Johnson. Author Keall is supported by NHMRC Australia.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2019/8
Y1 - 2019/8
N2 - Computed Tomography Ventilation Imaging (CTVI) is an experimental imaging modality that derives regional lung function information from non-contrast respiratory-correlated CT datasets. Despite CTVI being extensively studied in cross-modality imaging comparisons, there is a lack of consensus on the state of its clinical validation in humans. This systematic review evaluates the CTVI clinical validation studies to date, highlights their common strengths and weaknesses and makes recommendations. We performed a PUBMED and EMBASE search of all English language papers on CTVI between 2000 and 2018. The results of these searches were filtered in accordance to a set of eligibility criteria and analysed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. One hundred and forty-four records were identified, and 66 full text records were reviewed. After detailed assessment, twenty-three full text papers met the selection criteria and were included in the final review. This included thirteen prospective studies, with 579 human subjects. Studies used diverse methodologies, with a large amount of heterogeneity between different studies in terms of the reference ventilation imaging modality (e.g. nuclear medicine, hyperpolarised gas MRI), imaging parameters, DIR algorithm(s) used, and ventilation metric(s) applied. The most common ventilation metrics used deformable image registration to evaluate the exhale-to-inhale motion field Jacobian determinant (DIR-Jac) or changes in air volume content based on Hounsfield Units (DIR-HU). The strength of correlation between CTVI and the reference ventilation imaging modalities was moderate to strong when evaluated at the lobar or global level, with the average +/- S.D. (number of studies) linear regression correlation coefficients were 0.73 +/- 0.25 (n = 6) and 0.86 +/- 0.11 (n = 12) for DIR-Jac and DIR-HU respectively, and the SPC were 0.45 +/- 0.31 (n = 6) and 0.41 +/- 0.11 (n = 5) for DIR-Jac and DIR-HU respectively. We concluded that it is difficult to make a broad statement about the validity of CTVI due to the diverse methods used in the validation literature. Typically, CTVI appears to show reasonable cross-modality correlations at the lobar/whole lung level but poor correlations at the voxel level. Since CTVI is seeing new implementations in prospective trials, it is clear that refinement and standardization of the clinical validation methodologies are required. CTVI appears to be of relevance in radiotherapy planning, particularly in patients whose main pulmonary impairment is not a gas exchange problem but alternative imaging approaches may need to be considered in patients with other pulmonary diseases (i.e. restrictive or gas exchange problems). (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
AB - Computed Tomography Ventilation Imaging (CTVI) is an experimental imaging modality that derives regional lung function information from non-contrast respiratory-correlated CT datasets. Despite CTVI being extensively studied in cross-modality imaging comparisons, there is a lack of consensus on the state of its clinical validation in humans. This systematic review evaluates the CTVI clinical validation studies to date, highlights their common strengths and weaknesses and makes recommendations. We performed a PUBMED and EMBASE search of all English language papers on CTVI between 2000 and 2018. The results of these searches were filtered in accordance to a set of eligibility criteria and analysed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. One hundred and forty-four records were identified, and 66 full text records were reviewed. After detailed assessment, twenty-three full text papers met the selection criteria and were included in the final review. This included thirteen prospective studies, with 579 human subjects. Studies used diverse methodologies, with a large amount of heterogeneity between different studies in terms of the reference ventilation imaging modality (e.g. nuclear medicine, hyperpolarised gas MRI), imaging parameters, DIR algorithm(s) used, and ventilation metric(s) applied. The most common ventilation metrics used deformable image registration to evaluate the exhale-to-inhale motion field Jacobian determinant (DIR-Jac) or changes in air volume content based on Hounsfield Units (DIR-HU). The strength of correlation between CTVI and the reference ventilation imaging modalities was moderate to strong when evaluated at the lobar or global level, with the average +/- S.D. (number of studies) linear regression correlation coefficients were 0.73 +/- 0.25 (n = 6) and 0.86 +/- 0.11 (n = 12) for DIR-Jac and DIR-HU respectively, and the SPC were 0.45 +/- 0.31 (n = 6) and 0.41 +/- 0.11 (n = 5) for DIR-Jac and DIR-HU respectively. We concluded that it is difficult to make a broad statement about the validity of CTVI due to the diverse methods used in the validation literature. Typically, CTVI appears to show reasonable cross-modality correlations at the lobar/whole lung level but poor correlations at the voxel level. Since CTVI is seeing new implementations in prospective trials, it is clear that refinement and standardization of the clinical validation methodologies are required. CTVI appears to be of relevance in radiotherapy planning, particularly in patients whose main pulmonary impairment is not a gas exchange problem but alternative imaging approaches may need to be considered in patients with other pulmonary diseases (i.e. restrictive or gas exchange problems). (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
KW - Lung cancer
KW - Radiotherapy
KW - Pneumonitis
KW - Computed tomography
KW - Ventilation
KW - COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY VENTILATION
KW - LUNG-FUNCTION
KW - PULMONARY VENTILATION
KW - RADIOTHERAPY
KW - IMAGES
KW - SPECT
KW - 4DCT-VENTILATION
KW - 4D-CT
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.03.010
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.03.010
M3 - (Systematic) Review article
SN - 0167-8140
VL - 137
SP - 175
EP - 185
JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology
JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology
ER -