Cargando…

Deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head CT in trauma

PURPOSE: To compare the image quality between a deep learning–based image reconstruction algorithm (DLIR) and an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm (ASiR-V) in noncontrast trauma head CT. METHODS: Head CT scans from 94 consecutive trauma patients were included. Images were recon...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alagic, Zlatan, Diaz Cardenas, Jacqueline, Halldorsson, Kolbeinn, Grozman, Vitali, Wallgren, Stig, Suzuki, Chikako, Helmenkamp, Johan, Koskinen, Seppo K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8917108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34984574
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10140-021-02012-2
_version_ 1784668464663756800
author Alagic, Zlatan
Diaz Cardenas, Jacqueline
Halldorsson, Kolbeinn
Grozman, Vitali
Wallgren, Stig
Suzuki, Chikako
Helmenkamp, Johan
Koskinen, Seppo K.
author_facet Alagic, Zlatan
Diaz Cardenas, Jacqueline
Halldorsson, Kolbeinn
Grozman, Vitali
Wallgren, Stig
Suzuki, Chikako
Helmenkamp, Johan
Koskinen, Seppo K.
author_sort Alagic, Zlatan
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the image quality between a deep learning–based image reconstruction algorithm (DLIR) and an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm (ASiR-V) in noncontrast trauma head CT. METHODS: Head CT scans from 94 consecutive trauma patients were included. Images were reconstructed with ASiR-V 50% and the DLIR strengths: low (DLIR-L), medium (DLIR-M), and high (DLIR-H). The image quality was assessed quantitatively and qualitatively and compared between the different reconstruction algorithms. Inter-reader agreement was assessed by weighted kappa. RESULTS: DLIR-M and DLIR-H demonstrated lower image noise (p < 0.001 for all pairwise comparisons), higher SNR of up to 82.9% (p < 0.001), and higher CNR of up to 53.3% (p < 0.001) compared to ASiR-V. DLIR-H outperformed other DLIR strengths (p ranging from < 0.001 to 0.016). DLIR-M outperformed DLIR-L (p < 0.001) and ASiR-V (p < 0.001). The distribution of reader scores for DLIR-M and DLIR-H shifted towards higher scores compared to DLIR-L and ASiR-V. There was a tendency towards higher scores with increasing DLIR strengths. There were fewer non-diagnostic CT series for DLIR-M and DLIR-H compared to ASiR-V and DLIR-L. No images were graded as non-diagnostic for DLIR-H regarding intracranial hemorrhage. The inter-reader agreement was fair-good between the second most and the less experienced reader, poor-moderate between the most and the less experienced reader, and poor-fair between the most and the second most experienced reader. CONCLUSION: The image quality of trauma head CT series reconstructed with DLIR outperformed those reconstructed with ASiR-V. In particular, DLIR-M and DLIR-H demonstrated significantly improved image quality and fewer non-diagnostic images. The improvement in qualitative image quality was greater for the second most and the less experienced readers compared to the most experienced reader. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10140-021-02012-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8917108
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89171082022-03-17 Deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head CT in trauma Alagic, Zlatan Diaz Cardenas, Jacqueline Halldorsson, Kolbeinn Grozman, Vitali Wallgren, Stig Suzuki, Chikako Helmenkamp, Johan Koskinen, Seppo K. Emerg Radiol Original Article PURPOSE: To compare the image quality between a deep learning–based image reconstruction algorithm (DLIR) and an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm (ASiR-V) in noncontrast trauma head CT. METHODS: Head CT scans from 94 consecutive trauma patients were included. Images were reconstructed with ASiR-V 50% and the DLIR strengths: low (DLIR-L), medium (DLIR-M), and high (DLIR-H). The image quality was assessed quantitatively and qualitatively and compared between the different reconstruction algorithms. Inter-reader agreement was assessed by weighted kappa. RESULTS: DLIR-M and DLIR-H demonstrated lower image noise (p < 0.001 for all pairwise comparisons), higher SNR of up to 82.9% (p < 0.001), and higher CNR of up to 53.3% (p < 0.001) compared to ASiR-V. DLIR-H outperformed other DLIR strengths (p ranging from < 0.001 to 0.016). DLIR-M outperformed DLIR-L (p < 0.001) and ASiR-V (p < 0.001). The distribution of reader scores for DLIR-M and DLIR-H shifted towards higher scores compared to DLIR-L and ASiR-V. There was a tendency towards higher scores with increasing DLIR strengths. There were fewer non-diagnostic CT series for DLIR-M and DLIR-H compared to ASiR-V and DLIR-L. No images were graded as non-diagnostic for DLIR-H regarding intracranial hemorrhage. The inter-reader agreement was fair-good between the second most and the less experienced reader, poor-moderate between the most and the less experienced reader, and poor-fair between the most and the second most experienced reader. CONCLUSION: The image quality of trauma head CT series reconstructed with DLIR outperformed those reconstructed with ASiR-V. In particular, DLIR-M and DLIR-H demonstrated significantly improved image quality and fewer non-diagnostic images. The improvement in qualitative image quality was greater for the second most and the less experienced readers compared to the most experienced reader. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10140-021-02012-2. Springer International Publishing 2022-01-05 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8917108/ /pubmed/34984574 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10140-021-02012-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Alagic, Zlatan
Diaz Cardenas, Jacqueline
Halldorsson, Kolbeinn
Grozman, Vitali
Wallgren, Stig
Suzuki, Chikako
Helmenkamp, Johan
Koskinen, Seppo K.
Deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head CT in trauma
title Deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head CT in trauma
title_full Deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head CT in trauma
title_fullStr Deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head CT in trauma
title_full_unstemmed Deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head CT in trauma
title_short Deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head CT in trauma
title_sort deep learning versus iterative image reconstruction algorithm for head ct in trauma
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8917108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34984574
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10140-021-02012-2
work_keys_str_mv AT alagiczlatan deeplearningversusiterativeimagereconstructionalgorithmforheadctintrauma
AT diazcardenasjacqueline deeplearningversusiterativeimagereconstructionalgorithmforheadctintrauma
AT halldorssonkolbeinn deeplearningversusiterativeimagereconstructionalgorithmforheadctintrauma
AT grozmanvitali deeplearningversusiterativeimagereconstructionalgorithmforheadctintrauma
AT wallgrenstig deeplearningversusiterativeimagereconstructionalgorithmforheadctintrauma
AT suzukichikako deeplearningversusiterativeimagereconstructionalgorithmforheadctintrauma
AT helmenkampjohan deeplearningversusiterativeimagereconstructionalgorithmforheadctintrauma
AT koskinenseppok deeplearningversusiterativeimagereconstructionalgorithmforheadctintrauma