Gil-Sun Hong1, Kyung-Hyun Do2, A-Yeon Son1, Kyung-Wook Jo3, Kwang Pyo Kim4, Jihye Yun1, Choong Wook Lee1. 1. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea. 2. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea. dokh@amc.seoul.kr. 3. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 4. Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare image quality and radiation dose between dual-energy subtraction (DES)-based bone suppression images (D-BSIs) and software-based bone suppression images (S-BSIs). METHODS: Chest radiographs (CXRs) of forty adult patients were obtained with the two X-ray devices, one with DES and one with bone suppression software. Three image quality metrics (relative mean absolute error (RMAE), peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), and structural similarity index (SSIM)) between original CXR and BSI for each of D-BSI and S-SBI groups were calculated for each bone and soft tissue areas. Two readers rated the visual image quality for original CXR and BSI for each of D-BSI and S-SBI groups. The dose area product (DAP) values were recorded. Paired t test was used to compare the image quality and DAP values between D-BSI and S-BSI groups. RESULTS: In bone areas, S-BSIs had better SSIM values than D-BSI (94.57 vs. 87.77) but worse RMAE and PSNR values (0.50 vs. 0.20; 20.93 vs. 34.37) (all p < 0.001). In soft tissue areas, S-BSIs had better SSIM values than D-BSI (97.56 vs. 91.42) but similar RMAE and PSNR values (0.29 vs. 0.27; 31.35 vs. 29.87) (all p < 0.001). Both readers gave S-BSIs significantly higher image quality scores than D-BSI (p < 0.001). The mean DAP in software-related images (0.98 dGy·cm2) was significantly lower than that in the DES-related images (1.48 dGy·cm2) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Bone suppression software significantly improved the image quality of bone suppression images with a relatively lower radiation dose, compared with dual-energy subtraction technique. KEY POINTS: • Bone suppression software preserves structure similarity of soft tissues better than dual-energy subtraction technique in bone suppression images. • Bone suppression software achieves superior image quality for lung lesions than dual-energy subtraction technique in bone suppression images. • Bone suppression software can decrease the radiation dose over the hardware-based image processing technique.
OBJECTIVES: To compare image quality and radiation dose between dual-energy subtraction (DES)-based bone suppression images (D-BSIs) and software-based bone suppression images (S-BSIs). METHODS: Chest radiographs (CXRs) of forty adult patients were obtained with the two X-ray devices, one with DES and one with bone suppression software. Three image quality metrics (relative mean absolute error (RMAE), peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), and structural similarity index (SSIM)) between original CXR and BSI for each of D-BSI and S-SBI groups were calculated for each bone and soft tissue areas. Two readers rated the visual image quality for original CXR and BSI for each of D-BSI and S-SBI groups. The dose area product (DAP) values were recorded. Paired t test was used to compare the image quality and DAP values between D-BSI and S-BSI groups. RESULTS: In bone areas, S-BSIs had better SSIM values than D-BSI (94.57 vs. 87.77) but worse RMAE and PSNR values (0.50 vs. 0.20; 20.93 vs. 34.37) (all p < 0.001). In soft tissue areas, S-BSIs had better SSIM values than D-BSI (97.56 vs. 91.42) but similar RMAE and PSNR values (0.29 vs. 0.27; 31.35 vs. 29.87) (all p < 0.001). Both readers gave S-BSIs significantly higher image quality scores than D-BSI (p < 0.001). The mean DAP in software-related images (0.98 dGy·cm2) was significantly lower than that in the DES-related images (1.48 dGy·cm2) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Bone suppression software significantly improved the image quality of bone suppression images with a relatively lower radiation dose, compared with dual-energy subtraction technique. KEY POINTS: • Bone suppression software preserves structure similarity of soft tissues better than dual-energy subtraction technique in bone suppression images. • Bone suppression software achieves superior image quality for lung lesions than dual-energy subtraction technique in bone suppression images. • Bone suppression software can decrease the radiation dose over the hardware-based image processing technique.