Home
Issues
Aim & Scope
Open Access
Indexing
Why publish with us
Contact
Editorial Board
Instructions to Authors (PDF)
Manuscript Types
Manuscript Formatting
How to submit
Preprints
Authorship & COI
Principles of Transparency Checklist
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
CrossMark
Data Policies
ORIGINAL STUDY
Prediction of postoperative DLCO in lung cancer patients
after lobectomy. Comparison between quantitative CT
and the anatomic method
1
Respiratory Function Laboratory, 1st
Respiratory Medicine Department, “Sotiria”
Hospital for Diseases of the Chest, University
of Athens, Greece
2
1st Department of Thoracic Surgery, “Sotiria”
Hospital for Diseases of the Chest, Athens,
Greece
3
Department of Medical Imaging and
Interventional Radiology, “Sotiria” Hospital for
Diseases of the Chest, Athens, Greece
Publication date: 2021-06-17
Corresponding author
Chrysovalantis V. Papageorgiou
1st Respiratory Medicine Department, “Sotiria” Hospital for Diseases of the Chest, University of Athens, Greece; 152 Mesogeion Ave, 11527 Athens, Greece
1st Respiratory Medicine Department, “Sotiria” Hospital for Diseases of the Chest, University of Athens, Greece; 152 Mesogeion Ave, 11527 Athens, Greece
Pneumon 2016;29(1):40-47
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Prediction of postoperative DLCO has a key role in the preoperative evaluation of lung resection candidates. The aim of the study is to evaluate the role of quantitative CT to predict postoperative DLCO in lung cancer patients undergoing lobectomy, comparing it with the anatomic method of segment counting.
Methods:
DLCO was measured preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively in 16 lung cancer patients undergoing lobectomy. Predicted postoperative values estimated with quantitative CT and the anatomic method were correlated to the actual postoperative measurements.
Results:
Pearson’s r was 0.81 for quantitative CT vs 0.75 for the anatomic method. The limits of agreement between predicted and actually measured postoperative DLCO were narrower for quantitative CT vs the anatomic method (-0.4±2.4 vs -0.45±2.8mmol/min/kPa respectively). Focusing on 8 patients with abnormal preoperative DLCO values, higher correlation and smaller mean difference was observed when using quantitative CT.
Conclusion:
Quantitative CT is more accurate than the anatomic method of functional segment counting for the prediction of postoperative DLCO in lobectomy candidates.
Prediction of postoperative DLCO has a key role in the preoperative evaluation of lung resection candidates. The aim of the study is to evaluate the role of quantitative CT to predict postoperative DLCO in lung cancer patients undergoing lobectomy, comparing it with the anatomic method of segment counting.
Methods:
DLCO was measured preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively in 16 lung cancer patients undergoing lobectomy. Predicted postoperative values estimated with quantitative CT and the anatomic method were correlated to the actual postoperative measurements.
Results:
Pearson’s r was 0.81 for quantitative CT vs 0.75 for the anatomic method. The limits of agreement between predicted and actually measured postoperative DLCO were narrower for quantitative CT vs the anatomic method (-0.4±2.4 vs -0.45±2.8mmol/min/kPa respectively). Focusing on 8 patients with abnormal preoperative DLCO values, higher correlation and smaller mean difference was observed when using quantitative CT.
Conclusion:
Quantitative CT is more accurate than the anatomic method of functional segment counting for the prediction of postoperative DLCO in lobectomy candidates.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None declared.
REFERENCES (20)
1.
Brunelli A, Kim AW, Berger KI, et al. Physiologic evaluation of the patient with lung cancer being considered for resectional surgery: diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2013;143(5 suppl):e166S-e90S.
2.
Markos J, Mullan BP, Hillman DR, et al. Preoperative assessment as a predictor of mortality and morbidity after lung resection. Am Rev Respir Dis 1989; 139: 902–10.
3.
Bolliger CT, Wyser C, Roser H, et al. Lung scanning and exercise testing for the prediction of postoperative performance in lung resection candidates at increased risk for complications. Chest 1995; 108:341–8.
4.
Giordano A, Calcagni ML, Meduri G, et al. Perfusion lung scintigraphy for the prediction of postlobectomy residual pulmonary function. Chest 1997; 111:1542-7.
5.
Bolliger CT, Guckel C, Engel H, et al. Prediction of functional reserves after lung resection: comparison between quantitative computed tomography, scintigraphy and anatomy. Respiration 2002; 69:482-9.
6.
Wu MT, Pan HB, Chiang A, et al. Prediction of postoperative lung function in patients with lung cancer: comparison of quantitative CT with perfusion scintigraphy. Am J Roentgenol 2002;178: 667-72.
7.
Ohno Y, Koyama H, Nogami M, et al. Postoperative lung function in lung cancer patients: comparative analysis of predictive capability of MRI, CT and SPECT. Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189:400-8.
8.
Ueda K, Tanaka T, Li TS, et al. Quantitative computed tomography for the prediction of pulmonary function after lung cancer surgery: a simple method using simulation software. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009; 35:414-8.
9.
Ohno Y, Koyama H, Nogami M, et al. State-of-the-art radiological techniques improve the assessment of postoperative lung function in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Radiol 2011; 77:97-104.
10.
Yoshimoto K, Nomori H, Mori T, et al. Prediction of pulmonary function after lung lobectomy by subsegments counting, computed tomography, single photon emission computed tomography and computed tomography: a comparative study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2009; 35:408-13.
11.
Papageorgiou CV, Antoniou D, Kaltsakas G, Koulouris NG. Role of quantitative CT in predicting postoperative FEV1 and chronic dyspnea in patients undergoing lung resection. Multidiscip Respir Med 2010; 5:188-93.
12.
MacIntyre N, Crapo RO, Viegi G, et al. Standardisation of the single-breath determination of carbon monoxide uptake in the lung. Eur Respir J 2005; 26:720-35.
13.
Miller MR, Hankinson J, Brusasco V, et al. ATS/ERS Task Force. Standardisation of spirometry. Eur Respir J 2005; 26:319-38.
14.
Brunelli A, Refai M, Salati M, et al. Carbon monoxide lung diffusion capacity improves risk stratification in patients without airflow obstruction: evidence for systematic measurement before lung resection. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2006;29:567-70.
15.
Ferguson MK, Vigneswaran WT. Diffusing capacity predicts morbidity after lung resection in patients without obstructive lung disease. Ann Thorac Surg 2008;85:1158-65.
16.
Ferguson MK, Watson S, Johnson E, et al. Predicted postoperative lung function is associated with all-cause long-term mortality after major lung resection for cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2014;45:660-4.
17.
Santini M, Fiorello A, Vicidomini G, et al. Role of diffusing capacity in predicting complications after lung resection for cancer. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2007;55:391-4.
19.
Brunelli A, Charloux A, Bolliger CT, et al. ERS/ESTS clinicalguidelines on fitness for radical therapy in lung cancer patients (surgery and chemoradiotherapy). Eur Respir J 2009; 34:17-41.
20.
Papageorgiou CV, Kaltsakas G, Koulouris NG. Prediction of postoperative lung function in patients with lung cancer: the role of quantitative CT imaging. Chest 2014;145:927-8.
| eISSN: | 1791-4914 |
| ISSN: | 1105-848X |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
