| Title |
Improved MDCT monitoring of pelvic myeloma bone disease through the use of a novel longitudinal bone subtraction post-processing algorithm
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Radiology, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00330-016-4642-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marius Horger, Wolfgang M. Thaiss, Hendrik Ditt, Katja Weisel, Jan Fritz, Konstantin Nikolaou, Shu Liao, Christopher Kloth |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a novel CT post-processing software that generates subtraction maps of baseline and follow-up CT examinations in the course of myeloma bone lesions. This study included 61 consecutive myeloma patients who underwent repeated whole-body reduced-dose MDCT at our institution between November 2013 and June 2015. CT subtraction maps classified a progressive disease (PD) vs. stable disease (SD)/remission. Bone subtraction maps (BSMs) only and in combination with 1-mm (BSM+) source images were compared with 5-mm axial/MPR scans. Haematological response categories at follow-up were: complete remission (n = 9), very good partial remission (n = 2), partial remission (n = 17) and SDh (n = 19) vs. PDh (n = 14). Five-millimetre CT scan yielded PD (n = 14) and SD/remission (n = 47) whereas bone subtraction + 1-mm axial scans (BSM+) reading resulted in PD (n = 18) and SD/remission (n = 43). Sensitivity/ specificity/accuracy for 5-mm/1-mm/BSM(alone)/BSM + in "lesion-by-lesion" reading was 89.4 %/98.9 %/98.3 %/ 99.5 %; 69.1 %/96.9 %/72 %/92.1 % and 83.8 %/98.4 %/92.1 %/98.3 %, respectively. The use of BSM+ resulted in a change of response classification in 9.8 % patients (n = 6) from SD to PD. BSM reading is more accurate for monitoring myeloma compared to axial scans whereas BSM+ yields similar results with 1-mm reading (gold standard) but by significantly reduced reading time. • CT evaluation of myeloma bone disease using a longitudinal bone subtraction post-processing algorithm. • Bone subtraction post-processing algorithm is more accurate for assessment of therapy. • Bone subtraction allowed improved and more efficient detection of myeloma bone lesions. • Post-processing tool demonstrating a change in response classification in 9.8 % patients (all showing PD). • Reading time could be substantially shortened as compared to regular CT assessment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 29% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 5 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 12% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 June 2017.
All research outputs
#18,483,671
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#2,919
of 4,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#303,068
of 415,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#34
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,128 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 415,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.