-
J Comput Assist Tomogr · May 2005
High-resolution computed tomography features of nonspecific interstitial pneumonia and usual interstitial pneumonia.
- Tracy L Elliot, David A Lynch, John D Newell, Carlyne Cool, Rubin Tuder, Katerina Markopoulou, Robert Veve, and Kevin K Brown.
- Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
- J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2005 May 1;29(3):339-45.
ObjectiveTo assess the accuracy of high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) in the diagnosis of nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP). We hypothesized that the computed tomography (CT) features of NSIP could be distinguished from those of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP).MethodsThe HRCT images of 47 patients with surgical lung biopsy-proven NSIP (n = 25) and UIP (n = 22) were independently reviewed by 2 thoracic radiologists. Predominant imaging patterns, most likely diagnosis, and diagnostic level of confidence were recorded. A confident HRCT diagnosis of NSIP was based on the presence of spatially uniform, bilateral, basal-predominant ground-glass and/or reticular opacities with little if any honeycombing, whereas UIP was confidently diagnosed if a spatially inhomogeneous, bilateral, peripheral, basal-predominant pattern of reticular opacities and honeycombing with little if any ground-glass attenuation was identified.ResultsA predominant pattern of ground-glass and/or reticular opacity with minimal to no honeycombing was demonstrated in 48 (96%) of 50 readings in patients with NSIP. Conversely, the presence of honeycombing as a predominant feature had a predictive value of 90% for UIP (P < 0.001). Usual interstitial pneumonia was more likely than NSIP to be subpleural and patchy (P < 0.001). A confident CT diagnosis of NSIP and UIP was correct in 73% and 88% of cases, respectively. The correctness of a CT diagnosis made at intermediate or high confidence was 68% and 88%, respectively. The kappa value for distinction of NSIP from UIP was 0.72.ConclusionIn contrast to previous reports, NSIP can be separated from UIP in most cases. The presence of honeycombing as a predominant imaging finding is highly specific for UIP and can be used to differentiate it from NSIP, particularly when the distribution is patchy and subpleural predominant. The presence of predominant ground-glass and reticular opacity is highly characteristic of NSIP, but there is a subset of patients with UIP who have this pattern and may require biopsy for differentiation from NSIP.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?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.
.