• Eur J Clin Nutr · Jan 2019

    Reliability and validity of the new VikingSlice software for computed tomography body composition analysis.

    • Imanta Ozola-Zālīte, Esben Bolvig Mark, Tomas Gudauskas, Vladimir Lyadov, Søren Schou Olesen, Asbjørn Mohr Drewes, Aldis Pukitis, and Jens Brøndum Frokjær.
    • Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Centre, Pauls Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia.
    • Eur J Clin Nutr. 2019 Jan 1; 73 (1): 54-61.

    Background/ObjectivesBody composition assessment by computed tomography (CT) is increasingly used for diagnostic and prognostic purposes in various patient groups. This study aimed to compare the reliability and validity of a newly in-house developed segmentation software VikingSlice against a commercial software (SliceOMatic) for quantification of adipose tissue and skeletal muscle cross-sectional areas (CSA).Subjects/MethodsFifty abdominal CT sets from chronic pancreatitis patients were analyzed (mean age 49, range 27-84 years; 38 males). Soft tissue CSAs at level of 4th lumbar vertebra were assessed by measuring standard Hounsfield unit threshold definitions with both softwares. Analysis with VikingSlice included automatic segmentation of interested region with subsequent manual corrections. Analysis with SliceOMatic included manual segmentation of each area. Same investigator measured CSAs using both programs. Inter-observer reliability of CSAs measurements with VikingSlice were assessed by comparing results from two independent investigators. Measurements were compared using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV), Jaccard index and Bland-Altman analyses.ResultsThe inter-observer reliability of VikingSlice was excellent (CV 3.4-15.4%, ICC 0.979-0.999, Jaccard index 0.68-0.98). Validity was high (CV 1.6-10.2%, ICC 0.950-0.997) for measurements by SliceOmatic and VikingSlice. The findings were supported in the Bland-Altman plots. The reliability study had small average differences with means of soft tissue compartments in range -2.29 cm2 to 1.56 cm2; average differences between both softwares were -1.28 cm2 to 0.31 cm2.ConclusionsThe in-house developed software VikingSlice was fast and showed good reliability that is comparable with commercial software in its utility to estimate adipose tissue and skeletal muscle CSAs.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…