IOVS Physiological Genomics
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

(Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2008;49:1758-1762.)
© 2008 by The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
DOI:  10.1167/iovs.07-1030
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Regensburg, N. I.
Right arrow Articles by Mourits, M. P.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Regensburg, N. I.
Right arrow Articles by Mourits, M. P.

A New and Validated CT-Based Method for the Calculation of Orbital Soft Tissue Volumes

Noortje I. Regensburg,1 Pauline H. B. Kok,1 Frans W. Zonneveld,2 Lelio Baldeschi,1 Peerooz Saeed,1 Wilmar M. Wiersinga,3 and Maarten P. Mourits1

1From the Orbital Centre, Department of Ophthalmology, and the 3Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; and the 2Department of Radiology, University Medical Centre, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

PURPOSE. There is no consensus as how to calculate orbital soft tissue volume based on CT or MRI scans. The authors sought to validate their technique and to assess the intraobserver and interobserver variability of their calculations of bony orbital volume (OV), orbital fat volume (FV), and extraocular muscle volume (MV) on CT scans of humans.

METHODS. The authors calculated these volumes with the use of a manual segmentation technique on CT scans with commercially available software. Two observers (one of them masked) calculated the orbital soft tissue volumes in a CT scan of a phantom constructed of dry skull, butter, and chicken muscle. These calculations were compared with previously taken standard volume measurements of these materials. Repetitive calculations on one CT scan by the same observer were compared. Soft tissue volumes taken from 10 orbital CT scans were calculated by two observers and compared. From the data acquired, intraobserver and interobserver variability was calculated.

RESULTS. Outcomes of these calculations using this software approximated the volumes of the phantom measured with standardized techniques. Accuracy of the phantom calculations between the two observers varied from +0.7% to –0.7% for FV and between –1.5% and –2.2% for MV. Mean differences between the repeated calculations were smaller than 5%. The intraclass correlation coefficient varied from 0.961 to 0.999.

CONCLUSIONS. Calculating orbital soft tissue volume using a manual segmentation technique for CT scans is a reliable and accurate tool.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology