Assessment of cone beam computed tomography techniques for imaging lung damage in mice in vivo

Lung damage is a common side effect of chemotherapeutic drugs such as bleomycin. This study used a bleomycin mouse model which simulates the lung damage observed in humans. Noninvasive, in vivo cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to visualize and quantify fibrotic and inflammatory damage over the entire lung volume of mice. Bleomycin was used to induce pulmonary damage in vivo and the results from two CBCT systems, a micro-CT and flat panel CT (fpCT), were compared to histologic measurements, the standard method of murine lung damage quantification. Twenty C57BL/6 mice were given either 3 U/kg of bleomycin or saline intratracheally. The mice were scanned at baseline, before the administration of bleomycin, and then 10, 14, and 21 days afterward. At each time point, a subset of mice was sacrificed for histologic analysis. The resulting CT images were used to assess lung volume. Percent lung damage (PLD) was calculated for each mouse on both the fpCT (PLDfpcT) and the micro-CT (PLDμCT). Histologic PLD (PLDH) was calculated for each histologic section at each time point (day 10, n = 4; day 14, n = 4; day 21, n = 5; control group, n = 5). A linear regression was applied to the PLDfpCT vs. PLDH, PLDμCT vs. PLDH and PLDfpCT vs. PLDμCT distributions. This study did not demonstrate strong correlations between PLDCT and PLDH. The coefficient of determination, R, was 0.68 for PLDμCT vs. PLDH and 0.75 for the PLD fpCT vs. PLDH. The experimental issues identified from this study were: (1) inconsistent inflation of the lungs from scan to scan, (2) variable distribution of damage (one histologic section not representative of overall lung damage), (3) control mice not scanned with each group of bleomycin mice, (4) two CT systems caused long anesthesia time for the mice, and (5) respiratory gating did not hold the volume of lung constant throughout the scan. Addressing these issues might allow for further improvement of the correlation between PLDCT and PLDH. ^

A comparison of techniques for forecasting utilization of Veterans Affairs hospitals

This study demonstrated that accurate, short-term forecasts of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital utilization can be made using the Patient Treatment File (PTF), the inpatient discharge database of the VA. Accurate, short-term forecasts of two years or less can reduce required inventory levels, improve allocation of resources, and are essential for better financial management. These are all necessary achievements in an era of cost-containment.^ Six years of non-psychiatric discharge records were extracted from the PTF and used to calculate four indicators of VA hospital utilization: average length of stay, discharge rate, multi-stay rate (a measure of readmissions) and days of care provided. National and regional levels of these indicators were described and compared for fiscal year 1984 (FY84) to FY89 inclusive.^ Using the observed levels of utilization for the 48 months between FY84 and FY87, five techniques were used to forecast monthly levels of utilization for FY88 and FY89. Forecasts were compared to the observed levels of utilization for these years. Monthly forecasts were also produced for FY90 and FY91.^ Forecasts for days of care provided were not produced. Current inpatients with very long lengths of stay contribute a substantial amount of this indicator and it cannot be accurately calculated.^ During the six year period between FY84 and FY89, average length of stay declined substantially, nationally and regionally. The discharge rate was relatively stable, while the multi-stay rate increased slightly during this period. FY90 and FY91 forecasts show a continued decline in the average length of stay, while the discharge rate is forecast to decline slightly and the multi-stay rate is forecast to increase very slightly.^ Over a 24 month ahead period, all three indicators were forecast within a 10 percent average monthly error. The 12-month ahead forecast errors were slightly lower. Average length of stay was less easily forecast, while the multi-stay rate was the easiest indicator to forecast.^ No single technique performed significantly better as determined by the Mean Absolute Percent Error, a standard measure of error. However, Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) models performed well overall and are recommended for short-term forecasting of VA hospital utilization. ^