Added Value of CT Pelvic Bone Unfolding Software to Radiologist Performance in Detecting Osteoblastic Pelvic Bone Lesions in Patients With Prostate Cancer

Cerit M. N. , Kılıç K., Fetullayeva T., Zengin H. Y. , Erdoğan N., Şendur H. N. , ...More

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF RADIOLOGISTS JOURNAL-JOURNAL DE L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES RADIOLOGISTES, vol.72, no.4, pp.775-782, 2021 (Peer-Reviewed Journal) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 72 Issue: 4
  • Publication Date: 2021
  • Doi Number: 10.1177/0846537120983241
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded, Scopus, Academic Search Premier, Biotechnology Research Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE
  • Page Numbers: pp.775-782
  • Keywords: computed tomography, prostate cancer, bone metastasis, pelvic bone, CT bone unfolding software, VISUALIZATION ALGORITHM, SENSITIVITY, METASTASES, DISEASE


Purpose: To evaluate the contribution of CT Bone Unfolding software to the diagnostic accuracy and efficiency for the detection of osteoblastic pelvic bone lesions in patients with prostate cancer. Methods: A total of 102 consecutive (January 2016-September 2019) patients who underwent abdominopelvic CT with prostate cancer were retrospectively evaluated for osteoblastic pelvic bone lesions, using commercially available the post-processing-pelvic bone flattening-image software package "CT Bone Unfolding." Two radiologists with 3 and 15 years of experience in abdominal radiology evaluated CT image data sets independently in 2 separate reading sessions. At the first session, only MPR images and at the second session MPR images and additionally unfolded reconstructions were assessed. Reading time for each patient was noted. A radiologist with 25 years of experience, established the standard of reference. Results: In the evaluations performed with the MPR-Unfold method, the diagnostic accuracy were found to be 2.067 times higher compared to the MPRs method (P < 0.001). The location of the lesions or the reader variabilities did not show any influence on accuracy (P > 0.05) For all readers the reading time for MPR was significantly longer than for MPR-Unfold (P < 0.05). For both methods substantial to almost-perfect inter-reader agreement was found (0.686-0.936). Conclusions: The use of unfolded pelvic bone reconstructions increases diagnostic accuracy while decreasing the reading times in the evaluation of pelvic bone lesions. Therefore, our findings suggest that utilizing unfolded reconstructions in addition to MPR images may be preferable in patients with prostate cancer for the screening of osteoblastic pelvic bone lesions.