Image quality improvement with deep learning-based reconstruction on abdominal ultrahigh-resolution CT: A phantom study.
deep learning-based reconstruction
ultrahigh-resolution CT
Journal
Journal of applied clinical medical physics
ISSN: 1526-9914
Titre abrégé: J Appl Clin Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101089176
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Jul 2021
Historique:
revised:
15
04
2021
received:
07
08
2020
accepted:
19
05
2021
pubmed:
24
6
2021
medline:
24
7
2021
entrez:
23
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In an ultrahigh-resolution CT (U-HRCT), deep learning-based reconstruction (DLR) is expected to drastically reduce image noise without degrading spatial resolution. We assessed a new algorithm's effect on image quality at different radiation doses assuming an abdominal CT protocol. For the normal-sized abdominal models, a Catphan 600 was scanned by U-HRCT with 100%, 50%, and 25% radiation doses. In all acquisitions, DLR was compared to model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), filtered back projection (FBP), and hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR). For the quantitative assessment, we compared image noise, which was defined as the standard deviation of the CT number, and spatial resolution among all reconstruction algorithms. Deep learning-based reconstruction yielded lower image noise than FBP and HIR at each radiation dose. DLR yielded higher image noise than MBIR at the 100% and 50% radiation doses (100%, 50%, DLR: 15.4, 16.9 vs MBIR: 10.2, 15.6 Hounsfield units: HU). However, at the 25% radiation dose, the image noise in DLR was lower than that in MBIR (16.7 vs. 26.6 HU). The spatial frequency at 10% of the modulation transfer function (MTF) in DLR was 1.0 cycles/mm, slightly lower than that in MBIR (1.05 cycles/mm) at the 100% radiation dose. Even when the radiation dose decreased, the spatial frequency at 10% of the MTF of DLR did not change significantly (50% and 25% doses, 0.98 and 0.99 cycles/mm, respectively). Deep learning-based reconstruction performs more consistently at decreasing dose in abdominal ultrahigh-resolution CT compared to all other commercially available reconstruction algorithms evaluated.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34159736
doi: 10.1002/acm2.13318
pmc: PMC8292685
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
286-296Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
Eur Radiol. 2019 Nov;29(11):6163-6171
pubmed: 30976831
Med Phys. 2014 Apr;41(4):041906
pubmed: 24694137
Circ J. 2018 Jun 25;82(7):1844-1851
pubmed: 29743388
World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Nov 7;21(41):11767-76
pubmed: 26557001
Eur J Radiol. 2018 Apr;101:30-37
pubmed: 29571798
Radiology. 2018 Oct;289(1):255-260
pubmed: 29944085
Eur Radiol. 2017 Dec;27(12):5252-5259
pubmed: 28374080
Radiology. 2013 Jan;266(1):197-206
pubmed: 23169793
Radiology. 2002 Sep;224(3):757-63
pubmed: 12202710
Phys Med Biol. 2007 Jul 21;52(14):4047-61
pubmed: 17664594
Acta Radiol. 2017 Sep;58(9):1085-1093
pubmed: 28068822
Eur J Radiol. 2015 Sep;84(9):1715-23
pubmed: 26037266
Cancer Control. 2017 Jul-Sep;24(3):1073274817729245
pubmed: 28975830
Eur Radiol. 2018 Dec;28(12):5060-5068
pubmed: 29845337
Radiology. 2013 Nov;269(2):469-74
pubmed: 23847252
Acad Radiol. 2018 Jul;25(7):869-876
pubmed: 29373211
Eur J Radiol. 2018 Jun;103:71-75
pubmed: 29803389
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 09;10(9):e0137165
pubmed: 26352144
Clin Radiol. 2019 Jan;74(1):51-58
pubmed: 29627067
Gastroenterology. 2004 Nov;127(5 Suppl 1):S5-S16
pubmed: 15508102
Med Phys. 2012 Jul;39(7):4115-22
pubmed: 22830744
Data Brief. 2017 Jun 16;13:437-443
pubmed: 28702482
Eur Radiol. 2019 Oct;29(10):5322-5329
pubmed: 30963270
Pediatr Radiol. 2016 Nov;46(12):1663-1670
pubmed: 27531216