Literature DB >> 34993117

A phantom study comparing low-dose CT physical image quality from five different CT scanners.

Yali Li1, Yaojun Jiang1, Huilong Liu1, Xi Yu1, Sihui Chen1, Duoshan Ma1, Jianbo Gao1, Yan Wu1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To systematically evaluate the physical image quality of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) on CT scanners from 5 different manufacturers using a phantom model.
METHODS: CT images derived from a Catphan 500 phantom were acquired using manufacturer-specific iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms and deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR) on CT scanners from 5 different manufacturers and compared using filtered back projection with 2 radiation doses of 0.25 and 0.75 mGy. Image high-contrast spatial resolution and image noise were objectively characterized by modulation transfer function (MTF) and noise power spectrum (NPS). Image high-contrast spatial resolution and image low-contrast detectability were compared directly by visual evaluation. CT number linearity and image uniformity were compared with intergroup differences using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).
RESULTS: The CT number linearity of 4 insert materials were as follows: acrylic (95% CI: 120.35 to 121.27; P=0.134), low-density polyethylene (95% CI: -98.43 to -97.43; P=0.070), air (95% CI: -996.16 to -994.51; P=0.018), and Teflon (95% CI: 984.40 to 986.87; P=0.883). The image uniformity values of GE Healthcare (95% CI: 3.24 to 3.83; P=0.138), Philips (95% CI: 2.62 to 3.70; P=0.299), Siemens (95% CI: 2.10 to 3.59; P=0.054), Minfound (95% CI: 2.35 to 3.65; P=0.589), and Neusoft (95% CI: 2.63 to 3.37; P=0.900) were evaluated and found to be within ±4 Hounsfield units (HU), with a range of 0.99-2.76 HU for standard deviations. There was no statistically significant difference in CT number linearity and image uniformity across the 5 CT scanners under different radiation doses with IR and DLIR algorithms (P>0.05). The resolution level at 10% MTF was 6.98 line-pairs-per-centimeter (lp/cm) on average, which was similar to the subjective evaluation results (mostly up to 7 lp/cm). DLIR at all 3 levels had the highest 50% MTF values among all reconstruction algorithms. For image low-contrast detectability, the minimum diameter of distinguishable contrast holes reached 4 mm at a 0.5% resolution. Increasing the radiation dose and IR strength reduced the image noise and NPS curve peak frequency while improving image low-contrast detectability.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the image quality of CT scanners from 5 different manufacturers in LDCT is comparable and that the CT number linearity is unbiased and can contribute to accurate bone mineral density quantification. 2022 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT); deep learning; image quality; iterative reconstruction (IR); phantom; quantitative computed tomography (QCT)

Year:  2022        PMID: 34993117      PMCID: PMC8666789          DOI: 10.21037/qims-21-245

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg        ISSN: 2223-4306


  47 in total

1.  Towards 4D dedicated breast CT perfusion imaging of cancer: development and validation of computer simulated images.

Authors:  Marco Caballo; Koen Michielsen; Christian Fedon; Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-12-13       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Iterative reconstruction methods in two different MDCT scanners: physical metrics and 4-alternative forced-choice detectability experiments--a phantom approach.

Authors:  Frédéric A Miéville; François Gudinchet; Francis Brunelle; François O Bochud; Francis R Verdun
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2012-01-02       Impact factor: 2.685

3.  Image quality of conventional images of dual-layer SPECTRAL CT: A phantom study.

Authors:  Fasco van Ommen; Edwin Bennink; Alain Vlassenbroek; Jan Willem Dankbaar; Arnold M R Schilham; Max A Viergever; Hugo W A M de Jong
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-05-28       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer.

Authors:  Timothy R Church; William C Black; Denise R Aberle; Christine D Berg; Kathy L Clingan; Fenghai Duan; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; David S Gierada; Gordon C Jones; Irene Mahon; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks; Amanda Jain; Sarah Baum
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 5.  Radiation risk from CT: implications for cancer screening.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Albert
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Accuracy, Linearity and Precision of Spine QCT vBMD Phantom Measurements for Different Brands of CT Scanner: A Multicentre Study.

Authors:  Yingwei Zhao; Kai Li; Yangyang Duanmu; Ling Wang; Xiaoming Xu; Yong Zhang; Jing Tang; Yujing Zhang; Zhenlin Li; Karen Hind; Glen M Blake; Xiaoguang Cheng
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2021-02-28       Impact factor: 2.617

7.  Quantitative analysis of the effect of iterative reconstruction using a phantom: determining the appropriate blending percentage.

Authors:  Hyun Gi Kim; Yong Eun Chung; Young Han Lee; Jin Young Choi; Mi Suk Park; Myeong Jin Kim; Ki Whang Kim
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.759

8.  Posterolateral lumbar fusion: Relationship between computed tomography Hounsfield units and symptomatic pseudoarthrosis.

Authors:  Ha Son Nguyen; Saman Shabani; Mohit Patel; Dennis Maiman
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2015-11-25

9.  A phantom study investigating the relationship between ground-glass opacity visibility and physical detectability index in low-dose chest computed tomography.

Authors:  Katsuhiro Ichikawa; Takeshi Kobayashi; Motoyasu Sagawa; Ayako Katagiri; Yukiko Uno; Ryo Nishioka; Jun Matsuyama
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Applying three different methods of measuring CTDIfree air to the extended CTDI formalism for wide-beam scanners (IEC 60601-2-44): A comparative study.

Authors:  Robert Bujila; Love Kull; Mats Danielsson; Jonas Andersson
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  2 in total

1.  The influence of a deep learning image reconstruction algorithm on the image quality and auto-analysis of pulmonary nodules at ultra-low dose chest CT: a phantom study.

Authors:  Xiaohui Li; Lei Deng; Yue Yao; Baobin Guo; Jianying Li; Quanxin Yang
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-05

2.  Deep-learning image reconstruction for image quality evaluation and accurate bone mineral density measurement on quantitative CT: A phantom-patient study.

Authors:  Yali Li; Yaojun Jiang; Xi Yu; Binbin Ren; Chunyu Wang; Sihui Chen; Duoshan Ma; Danyang Su; Huilong Liu; Xiangyang Ren; Xiaopeng Yang; Jianbo Gao; Yan Wu
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-08-11       Impact factor: 6.055

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.