No abstract

Repeatability of quantitative CT test results in LVRS candidates is high and unlikely to improve by using spirometric gating.

The image-comparison workstation is a versatile tool for comparative assessment of image quality. At x2 magnification, images compressed with either JPEG or WTCQ algorithms were indistinguishable from unaltered original images for most observers at compression ratios between 8:1 and 16:1, indicating that 10:1 compression is acceptable for primary image interpretation.

Substantial decreases in the lung volumes and emphysema index, increased airflow, possible reexpansion of some remaining lung, and the relation between preoperative quantitative CT indexes and clinical outcome suggest a multifactorial mechanism for improvement seen after surgery.

In emphysema, quantitative CT values correlate with outcome. Quantitative assessment of emphysema in candidates for lung-volume reduction surgery is potentially useful.

A relatively small percentage of patients are at risk for recurrence of primary disease following lung transplantation. Sarcoidosis is the most common disease to recur.

In 176 cases of primary musculo-skeletal tumors, the informative value of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging was compared with that of plain radiographic examination, angiography, scintigraphy, and computed tomography (CT). In all patients the surgical and histopathologic results were known. For bone tumors confined to the bone, MR imaging was excellent for evaluation of intraosseous extent, but it could not be proved significantly better than CT or scintigraphy. MR imaging was inferior to plain radiography and CT for evaluation of calcification, ossification, cortical destruction, and endosteal/periosteal reaction. For soft-tissue tumors and bone tumors with soft-tissue extension, MR imaging was significantly better than the other modalities in all variables examined: delineation between tumor and muscle, tumor and vessel, tumor and fat, tumor and joint, and tumor and bone, as well as depicting intralesional necrosis and bleeding.

Imaging studies may help predict the degree of improvement and therefore should be considered an integral part of an objective patient selection process. Radiography alone may be adequate for initial screening.