Comparison of endoscopic versus 3D CT derived airway measurements

Hollin E. Calloway, Julia S. Kimbell, Stephanie Davis, George Z. Retsch-Bogart, Elizabeth A. Pitkin, Kathleen Abode, Richard Superfine, Carlton J. Zdanski

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives/Hypothesis To understand: 1) how endoscopic airway measurements compare to three-dimensional (3D) CT derived measurements; 2) where each technique is potentially useful; and 3) where each has limitations. Study Design Compare airway diameters and cross-sectional areas from endoscopic images and CT derived 3D reconstructions. Methods Videobronchoscopy was performed and recorded on an adult-sized commercially available airway mannequin. At various levels, cross-sectional areas were measured from still video frames using a referent placed via the biopsy port. A 3D reconstruction was generated from a high resolution CT of the mannequin; planar sections were cut at similar cross-sectional levels; and cross-sectional areas were obtained. Results At three levels of mechanically generated tracheal stricture, the differences between the endoscopic measurement and CT-derived cross-sectional area were 1%, 0%, and 7% (1.8, 0.8, and 14 mm2). At the vocal folds, the difference was 9% (7.8 mm2). The tip of the epiglottis and width of the epiglottis differed by 27% and 10% (18.73 mm2, 0.40mm). The airway measurements at the base of tongue, minimal cross-sectional area of the pharynx, and choana differed by 26%, 36%, and 30% (101.40 mm2, 36.67 mm 2, 122.71 mm2). Conclusions Endoscopy is an effective tool for obtaining airway measurements compared with 3D reconstructions derived from CT. Concordance is best in geometrically simple areas where the entire cross-section measured is visible within one field of view (trachea, round; vocal folds, triangular) versus geometrically complex areas that encompass more than one field of view (i.e. pharynx, choana).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2136-2141
Number of pages6
JournalLaryngoscope
Volume123
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2013

Fingerprint

Epiglottis
Manikins
Nasopharynx
Vocal Cords
Pharynx
Trachea
Tongue
Endoscopy
Pathologic Constriction
Biopsy

Keywords

  • 3D CT
  • Airway
  • airway measurement
  • quantitative bronchoscopy
  • quantitative endoscopy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Calloway, H. E., Kimbell, J. S., Davis, S., Retsch-Bogart, G. Z., Pitkin, E. A., Abode, K., ... Zdanski, C. J. (2013). Comparison of endoscopic versus 3D CT derived airway measurements. Laryngoscope, 123(9), 2136-2141. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.23836

Comparison of endoscopic versus 3D CT derived airway measurements. / Calloway, Hollin E.; Kimbell, Julia S.; Davis, Stephanie; Retsch-Bogart, George Z.; Pitkin, Elizabeth A.; Abode, Kathleen; Superfine, Richard; Zdanski, Carlton J.

In: Laryngoscope, Vol. 123, No. 9, 09.2013, p. 2136-2141.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Calloway, HE, Kimbell, JS, Davis, S, Retsch-Bogart, GZ, Pitkin, EA, Abode, K, Superfine, R & Zdanski, CJ 2013, 'Comparison of endoscopic versus 3D CT derived airway measurements', Laryngoscope, vol. 123, no. 9, pp. 2136-2141. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.23836
Calloway HE, Kimbell JS, Davis S, Retsch-Bogart GZ, Pitkin EA, Abode K et al. Comparison of endoscopic versus 3D CT derived airway measurements. Laryngoscope. 2013 Sep;123(9):2136-2141. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.23836
Calloway, Hollin E. ; Kimbell, Julia S. ; Davis, Stephanie ; Retsch-Bogart, George Z. ; Pitkin, Elizabeth A. ; Abode, Kathleen ; Superfine, Richard ; Zdanski, Carlton J. / Comparison of endoscopic versus 3D CT derived airway measurements. In: Laryngoscope. 2013 ; Vol. 123, No. 9. pp. 2136-2141.
@article{860c81a3f77547d18f84831d74a39da3,
title = "Comparison of endoscopic versus 3D CT derived airway measurements",
abstract = "Objectives/Hypothesis To understand: 1) how endoscopic airway measurements compare to three-dimensional (3D) CT derived measurements; 2) where each technique is potentially useful; and 3) where each has limitations. Study Design Compare airway diameters and cross-sectional areas from endoscopic images and CT derived 3D reconstructions. Methods Videobronchoscopy was performed and recorded on an adult-sized commercially available airway mannequin. At various levels, cross-sectional areas were measured from still video frames using a referent placed via the biopsy port. A 3D reconstruction was generated from a high resolution CT of the mannequin; planar sections were cut at similar cross-sectional levels; and cross-sectional areas were obtained. Results At three levels of mechanically generated tracheal stricture, the differences between the endoscopic measurement and CT-derived cross-sectional area were 1{\%}, 0{\%}, and 7{\%} (1.8, 0.8, and 14 mm2). At the vocal folds, the difference was 9{\%} (7.8 mm2). The tip of the epiglottis and width of the epiglottis differed by 27{\%} and 10{\%} (18.73 mm2, 0.40mm). The airway measurements at the base of tongue, minimal cross-sectional area of the pharynx, and choana differed by 26{\%}, 36{\%}, and 30{\%} (101.40 mm2, 36.67 mm 2, 122.71 mm2). Conclusions Endoscopy is an effective tool for obtaining airway measurements compared with 3D reconstructions derived from CT. Concordance is best in geometrically simple areas where the entire cross-section measured is visible within one field of view (trachea, round; vocal folds, triangular) versus geometrically complex areas that encompass more than one field of view (i.e. pharynx, choana).",
keywords = "3D CT, Airway, airway measurement, quantitative bronchoscopy, quantitative endoscopy",
author = "Calloway, {Hollin E.} and Kimbell, {Julia S.} and Stephanie Davis and Retsch-Bogart, {George Z.} and Pitkin, {Elizabeth A.} and Kathleen Abode and Richard Superfine and Zdanski, {Carlton J.}",
year = "2013",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1002/lary.23836",
language = "English",
volume = "123",
pages = "2136--2141",
journal = "Laryngoscope",
issn = "0023-852X",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of endoscopic versus 3D CT derived airway measurements

AU - Calloway, Hollin E.

AU - Kimbell, Julia S.

AU - Davis, Stephanie

AU - Retsch-Bogart, George Z.

AU - Pitkin, Elizabeth A.

AU - Abode, Kathleen

AU - Superfine, Richard

AU - Zdanski, Carlton J.

PY - 2013/9

Y1 - 2013/9

N2 - Objectives/Hypothesis To understand: 1) how endoscopic airway measurements compare to three-dimensional (3D) CT derived measurements; 2) where each technique is potentially useful; and 3) where each has limitations. Study Design Compare airway diameters and cross-sectional areas from endoscopic images and CT derived 3D reconstructions. Methods Videobronchoscopy was performed and recorded on an adult-sized commercially available airway mannequin. At various levels, cross-sectional areas were measured from still video frames using a referent placed via the biopsy port. A 3D reconstruction was generated from a high resolution CT of the mannequin; planar sections were cut at similar cross-sectional levels; and cross-sectional areas were obtained. Results At three levels of mechanically generated tracheal stricture, the differences between the endoscopic measurement and CT-derived cross-sectional area were 1%, 0%, and 7% (1.8, 0.8, and 14 mm2). At the vocal folds, the difference was 9% (7.8 mm2). The tip of the epiglottis and width of the epiglottis differed by 27% and 10% (18.73 mm2, 0.40mm). The airway measurements at the base of tongue, minimal cross-sectional area of the pharynx, and choana differed by 26%, 36%, and 30% (101.40 mm2, 36.67 mm 2, 122.71 mm2). Conclusions Endoscopy is an effective tool for obtaining airway measurements compared with 3D reconstructions derived from CT. Concordance is best in geometrically simple areas where the entire cross-section measured is visible within one field of view (trachea, round; vocal folds, triangular) versus geometrically complex areas that encompass more than one field of view (i.e. pharynx, choana).

AB - Objectives/Hypothesis To understand: 1) how endoscopic airway measurements compare to three-dimensional (3D) CT derived measurements; 2) where each technique is potentially useful; and 3) where each has limitations. Study Design Compare airway diameters and cross-sectional areas from endoscopic images and CT derived 3D reconstructions. Methods Videobronchoscopy was performed and recorded on an adult-sized commercially available airway mannequin. At various levels, cross-sectional areas were measured from still video frames using a referent placed via the biopsy port. A 3D reconstruction was generated from a high resolution CT of the mannequin; planar sections were cut at similar cross-sectional levels; and cross-sectional areas were obtained. Results At three levels of mechanically generated tracheal stricture, the differences between the endoscopic measurement and CT-derived cross-sectional area were 1%, 0%, and 7% (1.8, 0.8, and 14 mm2). At the vocal folds, the difference was 9% (7.8 mm2). The tip of the epiglottis and width of the epiglottis differed by 27% and 10% (18.73 mm2, 0.40mm). The airway measurements at the base of tongue, minimal cross-sectional area of the pharynx, and choana differed by 26%, 36%, and 30% (101.40 mm2, 36.67 mm 2, 122.71 mm2). Conclusions Endoscopy is an effective tool for obtaining airway measurements compared with 3D reconstructions derived from CT. Concordance is best in geometrically simple areas where the entire cross-section measured is visible within one field of view (trachea, round; vocal folds, triangular) versus geometrically complex areas that encompass more than one field of view (i.e. pharynx, choana).

KW - 3D CT

KW - Airway

KW - airway measurement

KW - quantitative bronchoscopy

KW - quantitative endoscopy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883183388&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883183388&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/lary.23836

DO - 10.1002/lary.23836

M3 - Article

C2 - 24167819

AN - SCOPUS:84883183388

VL - 123

SP - 2136

EP - 2141

JO - Laryngoscope

JF - Laryngoscope

SN - 0023-852X

IS - 9

ER -