OBJECTIVES: We evaluated lower dose (LD) hepatic dynamic ultra-high-resolution computed tomography (U-HRCT) images reconstructed with deep learning reconstruction (DLR), hybrid iterative reconstruction (hybrid-IR), or model-based IR (MBIR) in comparison with standard-dose (SD) U-HRCT images reconstructed with hybrid-IR as the reference standard to identify the method that allowed for the greatest radiation dose reduction while preserving the diagnostic value. METHODS: Evaluated were 72 patients who had undergone hepatic dynamic U-HRCT; 36 were scanned with the standard radiation dose (SD group) and 36 with 70% of the SD (lower dose [LD] group). Hepatic arterial and equilibrium phase (HAP, EP) images were reconstructed with hybrid-IR in the SD group, and with hybrid-IR, MBIR, and DLR in the LD group. One radiologist recorded the standard deviation of attenuation in the paraspinal muscle as the image noise. The overall image quality was assessed by 3 other radiologists; they used a 5-point confidence scale ranging from 1 (unacceptable) to 5 (excellent). Superiority and equivalence with prespecified margins were assessed. RESULTS: With respect to the image noise, in the HAP and EP, LD DLR and LD MBIR images were superior to SD hybrid-IR images; LD hybrid-IR images were neither superior nor equivalent to SD hybrid-IR images. With respect to the quality scores, only LD DLR images were superior to SD hybrid-IR images. CONCLUSIONS: DLR preserved the quality of abdominal U-HRCT images even when scanned with a reduced radiation dose. KEY POINTS: • Lower dose DLR images were superior to the standard-dose hybrid-IR images quantitatively and qualitatively at abdominal U-HRCT. • Neither hybrid-IR nor MBIR may allow for a radiation dose reduction at abdominal U-HRCT without compromising the image quality. • Because DLR allows for a reduction in the radiation dose and maintains the image quality even at the thinnest slice section, DLR should be applied to abdominal U-HRCT scans.
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated lower dose (LD) hepatic dynamic ultra-high-resolution computed tomography (U-HRCT) images reconstructed with deep learning reconstruction (DLR), hybrid iterative reconstruction (hybrid-IR), or model-based IR (MBIR) in comparison with standard-dose (SD) U-HRCT images reconstructed with hybrid-IR as the reference standard to identify the method that allowed for the greatest radiation dose reduction while preserving the diagnostic value. METHODS: Evaluated were 72 patients who had undergone hepatic dynamic U-HRCT; 36 were scanned with the standard radiation dose (SD group) and 36 with 70% of the SD (lower dose [LD] group). Hepatic arterial and equilibrium phase (HAP, EP) images were reconstructed with hybrid-IR in the SD group, and with hybrid-IR, MBIR, and DLR in the LD group. One radiologist recorded the standard deviation of attenuation in the paraspinal muscle as the image noise. The overall image quality was assessed by 3 other radiologists; they used a 5-point confidence scale ranging from 1 (unacceptable) to 5 (excellent). Superiority and equivalence with prespecified margins were assessed. RESULTS: With respect to the image noise, in the HAP and EP, LD DLR and LD MBIR images were superior to SD hybrid-IR images; LD hybrid-IR images were neither superior nor equivalent to SD hybrid-IR images. With respect to the quality scores, only LD DLR images were superior to SD hybrid-IR images. CONCLUSIONS: DLR preserved the quality of abdominal U-HRCT images even when scanned with a reduced radiation dose. KEY POINTS: • Lower dose DLR images were superior to the standard-dose hybrid-IR images quantitatively and qualitatively at abdominal U-HRCT. • Neither hybrid-IR nor MBIR may allow for a radiation dose reduction at abdominal U-HRCT without compromising the image quality. • Because DLR allows for a reduction in the radiation dose and maintains the image quality even at the thinnest slice section, DLR should be applied to abdominal U-HRCT scans.
Entities:
Keywords:
Deep learning; Liver; Radiation dosage; Tomography, X-ray computed
Authors: Aleksandra Fucic; Stefano Bonassi; Sarolta Gundy; Juozas Lazutka; Radim Sram; Marcello Ceppi; Joe N Lucas Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 2.480