Cargando…

Accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study

No published studies have evaluated the accuracy of volumetric measurement of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules on low-dose or ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography, reconstructed using deep learning–based algorithms. This is an important issue in lung cancer screening. Our study aimed to in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Cherry, Kwack, Thomas, Kim, Wooil, Cha, Jaehyung, Yang, Zepa, Yong, Hwan Seok
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9223620/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35737734
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270122
_version_ 1784733169611702272
author Kim, Cherry
Kwack, Thomas
Kim, Wooil
Cha, Jaehyung
Yang, Zepa
Yong, Hwan Seok
author_facet Kim, Cherry
Kwack, Thomas
Kim, Wooil
Cha, Jaehyung
Yang, Zepa
Yong, Hwan Seok
author_sort Kim, Cherry
collection PubMed
description No published studies have evaluated the accuracy of volumetric measurement of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules on low-dose or ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography, reconstructed using deep learning–based algorithms. This is an important issue in lung cancer screening. Our study aimed to investigate the accuracy of semiautomatic volume measurement of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules, using two deep learning–based image reconstruction algorithms (Truefidelity and ClariCT.AI), compared with iterative reconstruction (ASiR-V) in low-dose and ultra–low-dose settings. We performed computed tomography scans of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules of different diameters placed in a phantom at four radiation doses (120 kVp/220 mA, 120 kVp/90 mA, 120 kVp/40 mA, and 80 kVp/40 mA). Each scan was reconstructed using Truefidelity, ClariCT.AI, and ASiR-V. The solid nodule and ground-glass nodule volumes were measured semiautomatically. The gold-standard volumes could be calculated using the diameter since all nodule phantoms are perfectly spherical. Subsequently, absolute percentage measurement errors of the measured volumes were calculated. Image noise was also calculated. Across all nodules at all dose settings, the absolute percentage measurement errors of Truefidelity and ClariCT.AI were less than 11%; they were significantly lower with Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI than with ASiR-V (all P<0.05). The absolute percentage measurement errors for the smallest solid nodule (3 mm) reconstructed by Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI at all dose settings were significantly lower than those of this nodule reconstructed by ASiR-V (all P<0.05). Furthermore, the lowest absolute percentage measurement errors for ground-glass nodules were observed with Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI at all dose settings. The absolute percentage measurement errors for ground-glass nodules reconstructed with Truefidelity at ultra–low-dose settings were significantly lower than those of all sizes of ground-glass nodules reconstructed with ASiR-V (all P<0.05). Image noise was lowest with Truefidelity (all P<0.05). In conclusion, the deep learning–based algorithms were more accurate for volume measurements of both solid nodules and ground-glass nodules than ASiR-V at both low-dose and ultra–low-dose settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9223620
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92236202022-06-24 Accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study Kim, Cherry Kwack, Thomas Kim, Wooil Cha, Jaehyung Yang, Zepa Yong, Hwan Seok PLoS One Research Article No published studies have evaluated the accuracy of volumetric measurement of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules on low-dose or ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography, reconstructed using deep learning–based algorithms. This is an important issue in lung cancer screening. Our study aimed to investigate the accuracy of semiautomatic volume measurement of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules, using two deep learning–based image reconstruction algorithms (Truefidelity and ClariCT.AI), compared with iterative reconstruction (ASiR-V) in low-dose and ultra–low-dose settings. We performed computed tomography scans of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules of different diameters placed in a phantom at four radiation doses (120 kVp/220 mA, 120 kVp/90 mA, 120 kVp/40 mA, and 80 kVp/40 mA). Each scan was reconstructed using Truefidelity, ClariCT.AI, and ASiR-V. The solid nodule and ground-glass nodule volumes were measured semiautomatically. The gold-standard volumes could be calculated using the diameter since all nodule phantoms are perfectly spherical. Subsequently, absolute percentage measurement errors of the measured volumes were calculated. Image noise was also calculated. Across all nodules at all dose settings, the absolute percentage measurement errors of Truefidelity and ClariCT.AI were less than 11%; they were significantly lower with Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI than with ASiR-V (all P<0.05). The absolute percentage measurement errors for the smallest solid nodule (3 mm) reconstructed by Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI at all dose settings were significantly lower than those of this nodule reconstructed by ASiR-V (all P<0.05). Furthermore, the lowest absolute percentage measurement errors for ground-glass nodules were observed with Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI at all dose settings. The absolute percentage measurement errors for ground-glass nodules reconstructed with Truefidelity at ultra–low-dose settings were significantly lower than those of all sizes of ground-glass nodules reconstructed with ASiR-V (all P<0.05). Image noise was lowest with Truefidelity (all P<0.05). In conclusion, the deep learning–based algorithms were more accurate for volume measurements of both solid nodules and ground-glass nodules than ASiR-V at both low-dose and ultra–low-dose settings. Public Library of Science 2022-06-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9223620/ /pubmed/35737734 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270122 Text en © 2022 Kim et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kim, Cherry
Kwack, Thomas
Kim, Wooil
Cha, Jaehyung
Yang, Zepa
Yong, Hwan Seok
Accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study
title Accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study
title_full Accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study
title_fullStr Accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study
title_short Accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study
title_sort accuracy of two deep learning–based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra–low-dose chest computed tomography: a phantom study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9223620/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35737734
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270122
work_keys_str_mv AT kimcherry accuracyoftwodeeplearningbasedreconstructionmethodscomparedwithanadaptivestatisticaliterativereconstructionmethodforsolidandgroundglassnodulevolumetryonlowdoseandultralowdosechestcomputedtomographyaphantomstudy
AT kwackthomas accuracyoftwodeeplearningbasedreconstructionmethodscomparedwithanadaptivestatisticaliterativereconstructionmethodforsolidandgroundglassnodulevolumetryonlowdoseandultralowdosechestcomputedtomographyaphantomstudy
AT kimwooil accuracyoftwodeeplearningbasedreconstructionmethodscomparedwithanadaptivestatisticaliterativereconstructionmethodforsolidandgroundglassnodulevolumetryonlowdoseandultralowdosechestcomputedtomographyaphantomstudy
AT chajaehyung accuracyoftwodeeplearningbasedreconstructionmethodscomparedwithanadaptivestatisticaliterativereconstructionmethodforsolidandgroundglassnodulevolumetryonlowdoseandultralowdosechestcomputedtomographyaphantomstudy
AT yangzepa accuracyoftwodeeplearningbasedreconstructionmethodscomparedwithanadaptivestatisticaliterativereconstructionmethodforsolidandgroundglassnodulevolumetryonlowdoseandultralowdosechestcomputedtomographyaphantomstudy
AT yonghwanseok accuracyoftwodeeplearningbasedreconstructionmethodscomparedwithanadaptivestatisticaliterativereconstructionmethodforsolidandgroundglassnodulevolumetryonlowdoseandultralowdosechestcomputedtomographyaphantomstudy