Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 18, 2026
12:29
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Quantification of Pulmonary Perfusion using Calibrated Arterial Spin Labeling
Published on: May 30, 2011
Reproducibility of postprocessing of quantitative CT perfusion maps.
Pina C Sanelli1, Gregory Nicola, Apostolos J Tsiouris
1Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 520 E 70th St., Starr 630, New York, NY 10021, USA. pcs9001@med.cornell.edu
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology
|December 21, 2006
Summary
Quantitative CT perfusion data for cerebral blood flow (CBF), cerebral blood volume (CBV), and mean transit time (MTT) are reproducible across different observers and skill levels. Semiautomated postprocessing shows higher reproducibility than fully automated methods.
Area of Science:
- Radiology
- Medical Imaging
- Neuroimaging
Background:
- CT perfusion imaging provides quantitative data on cerebral blood flow (CBF), cerebral blood volume (CBV), and mean transit time (MTT).
- Reproducibility of quantitative CT perfusion data is crucial for accurate diagnosis and treatment monitoring, especially in conditions like stroke.
- Variability in postprocessing can arise from differences in software, observer skill, and methodology.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess interobserver and intraobserver variability in quantitative CT perfusion data analysis.
- To compare the reproducibility of semiautomated versus fully automated postprocessing techniques.
- To evaluate the impact of observer skill and experience on the reliability of CT perfusion metrics.
Main Methods:
- Twenty CT perfusion datasets were analyzed.
- Five observers with varying expertise used semiautomated software after brief training.
- A neuroradiologist used fully automated software for comparison.
- Standard regions of interest were applied to quantify CBF, CBV, and MTT in specific brain regions.
- Intraobserver variability was assessed by repeating postprocessing on a subset of datasets.
Main Results:
- Semiautomated postprocessing showed low interobserver variability (2.5-9.5%) and high correlation (r=0.87-0.99).
- Fully automated postprocessing exhibited significantly greater variability (20.4%) and low correlation with observer-based results.
- Intraobserver variability for semiautomated analysis ranged from 0.29% to 10.8% with high correlation (r=0.91-0.99).
Conclusions:
- Quantitative CT perfusion parameters (CBF, CBV, MTT) are reproducible among observers with diverse skill levels using semiautomated postprocessing.
- Observer interaction with software is vital for accurate parameter identification and reproducible results.
- Standardized postprocessing techniques are essential for ensuring good reproducibility in CT perfusion studies.
