Gross tumour volume comparison in oropharynx carcinomas using different intelligent imaging software : a retrospective analysis

2020
journal article
article
1
cris.lastimport.wos2024-04-09T22:17:51Z
dc.abstract.enPurpose: To compare gross tumour volume (GTV) in oropharynx carcinomas using different intelligent imaging software and to evaluate which method is more reliable for tumour volume definition in comparison with 3D ProSoma software. Material and methods: We retrospectively studied 32 patients with histopathologically confirmed oropharynx carcinomas on dual-source computed tomography (CT) (all patients underwent multislice CT examination after applying 75 ml iodinated non-ionic contrast media). One radiologist calculated the tumour volume - manually measuring tumour length (L), width (W), and height (H) - and then calculated the tumour volume using the formula 0.5236 × L × W × H. The other radiologist used the syngo.CT-Liver-Analysis software to calculate the tumour volumes. Both volume measuring methods were compared with the 3D ProSoma software, which is used by radiotherapists to calculate tumour volumes. Graphpad Prism software was used for statistical data. Results: syngo.CT-Liver-Analysis software for gross tumour volume determination has greater reliability than the standard manual method with Syngo Plaza in comparison with the 3D ProSoma software. Conclusions: syngo.CT-Liver-Analysis software is a reliable tool for GTV calculation, with a high correlation score, like that of radiotherapeutic 3D ProSoma software.pl
dc.contributor.authorStuppner, Sigmundpl
dc.contributor.authorWaskiewicz, Justynapl
dc.contributor.authorRuiu, Antoniopl
dc.date.accessioned2020-07-08T11:38:00Z
dc.date.available2020-07-08T11:38:00Z
dc.date.issued2020pl
dc.date.openaccess0
dc.description.accesstimew momencie opublikowania
dc.description.additionalBibliogr. s. e292pl
dc.description.physicale287-e292pl
dc.description.versionostateczna wersja wydawcy
dc.description.volume85pl
dc.identifier.doi10.5114/pjr.2020.96156pl
dc.identifier.eissn1899-0967pl
dc.identifier.issn1733-134Xpl
dc.identifier.urihttps://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/165471
dc.languageengpl
dc.language.containerengpl
dc.rightsUdzielam licencji. Uznanie autorstwa - Użycie niekomercyjne - Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowa*
dc.rights.licenceCC-BY-NC-ND
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.pl*
dc.share.typeotwarte czasopismo
dc.subject.enradiotherapypl
dc.subject.enhead and neck neoplasmspl
dc.subject.entumor burdenpl
dc.subtypeArticlepl
dc.titleGross tumour volume comparison in oropharynx carcinomas using different intelligent imaging software : a retrospective analysispl
dc.title.journalPolish Journal of Radiologypl
dc.typeJournalArticlepl
dspace.entity.typePublication
cris.lastimport.wos
2024-04-09T22:17:51Z
dc.abstract.enpl
Purpose: To compare gross tumour volume (GTV) in oropharynx carcinomas using different intelligent imaging software and to evaluate which method is more reliable for tumour volume definition in comparison with 3D ProSoma software. Material and methods: We retrospectively studied 32 patients with histopathologically confirmed oropharynx carcinomas on dual-source computed tomography (CT) (all patients underwent multislice CT examination after applying 75 ml iodinated non-ionic contrast media). One radiologist calculated the tumour volume - manually measuring tumour length (L), width (W), and height (H) - and then calculated the tumour volume using the formula 0.5236 × L × W × H. The other radiologist used the syngo.CT-Liver-Analysis software to calculate the tumour volumes. Both volume measuring methods were compared with the 3D ProSoma software, which is used by radiotherapists to calculate tumour volumes. Graphpad Prism software was used for statistical data. Results: syngo.CT-Liver-Analysis software for gross tumour volume determination has greater reliability than the standard manual method with Syngo Plaza in comparison with the 3D ProSoma software. Conclusions: syngo.CT-Liver-Analysis software is a reliable tool for GTV calculation, with a high correlation score, like that of radiotherapeutic 3D ProSoma software.
dc.contributor.authorpl
Stuppner, Sigmund
dc.contributor.authorpl
Waskiewicz, Justyna
dc.contributor.authorpl
Ruiu, Antonio
dc.date.accessioned
2020-07-08T11:38:00Z
dc.date.available
2020-07-08T11:38:00Z
dc.date.issuedpl
2020
dc.date.openaccess
0
dc.description.accesstime
w momencie opublikowania
dc.description.additionalpl
Bibliogr. s. e292
dc.description.physicalpl
e287-e292
dc.description.version
ostateczna wersja wydawcy
dc.description.volumepl
85
dc.identifier.doipl
10.5114/pjr.2020.96156
dc.identifier.eissnpl
1899-0967
dc.identifier.issnpl
1733-134X
dc.identifier.uri
https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/165471
dc.languagepl
eng
dc.language.containerpl
eng
dc.rights*
Udzielam licencji. Uznanie autorstwa - Użycie niekomercyjne - Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowa
dc.rights.licence
CC-BY-NC-ND
dc.rights.uri*
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.pl
dc.share.type
otwarte czasopismo
dc.subject.enpl
radiotherapy
dc.subject.enpl
head and neck neoplasms
dc.subject.enpl
tumor burden
dc.subtypepl
Article
dc.titlepl
Gross tumour volume comparison in oropharynx carcinomas using different intelligent imaging software : a retrospective analysis
dc.title.journalpl
Polish Journal of Radiology
dc.typepl
JournalArticle
dspace.entity.type
Publication
Affiliations

* The migration of download and view statistics prior to the date of April 8, 2024 is in progress.

Views
39
Views per month
Views per city
Dublin
7
Ashburn
4
Helsinki
2
Lomé
2
New York
2
Sofia
2
Wroclaw
2
Brussels
1
San Jose
1
Szczecin
1
Downloads
stuppner_waskiewicz_ruiu_gross_tumour_volume_comparison_in_oropharynx_carcinomas_2020.pdf
2