Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 7/2021

01-07-2021 | Chest

Image quality of ultralow-dose chest CT using deep learning techniques: potential superiority of vendor-agnostic post-processing over vendor-specific techniques

Authors: Ju Gang Nam, Chulkyun Ahn, Hyewon Choi, Wonju Hong, Jongsoo Park, Jong Hyo Kim, Jin Mo Goo

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 7/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To compare the image quality between the vendor-agnostic and vendor-specific algorithms on ultralow-dose chest CT.

Methods

Vendor-agnostic deep learning post-processing model (DLM), vendor-specific deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR, high level), and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR, 70%) algorithms were employed. One hundred consecutive ultralow-dose noncontrast CT scans (CTDIvol; mean, 0.33 ± 0.056 mGy) were reconstructed with five algorithms: DLM-stnd (standard kernel), DLM-shrp (sharp kernel), DLIR, ASiR-stnd, and ASiR-shrp. Three thoracic radiologists blinded to the reconstruction algorithms reviewed five sets of 100 images and assessed subjective noise, spatial resolution, distortion artifact, and overall image quality. They selected the most preferred algorithm among five image sets for each case. Image noise and signal-to-noise ratio were measured. Edge-rise-distance was measured at a pulmonary vessel, i.e., the distance between two points where attenuation was 10% and 90% of maximal intravascular intensity. The skewness of attenuation was calculated in homogeneous areas.

Results

DLM-stnd, followed by DLIR, showed the best subjective noise on both lung and mediastinal windows, while DLIR yielded the least measured noise (ps < .0001). Compared to DLM-stnd, DLIR showed inferior subjective spatial resolution on lung window and higher edge-rise-distance (ps < .0001). Additionally, DLIR showed the most frequent distortion artifacts and deviated skewness (ps < .0001). DLM-stnd scored the best overall image quality, followed by DLM-shrp and DLIR (mean score 3.89 ± 0.19, 3.68 ± 0.24, and 3.53 ± 0.33; ps < .001). Two among three readers preferred DLM-stnd on both windows.

Conclusion

Although DLIR provided the best quantitative noise profile, DLM-stnd showed the best overall image quality with fewer artifacts and was preferred by two among three readers.

Key Points

• A vendor-agnostic deep learning post-processing algorithm applied to ultralow-dose chest CT exhibited the best image quality compared to vendor-specific deep learning algorithm and ASiR techniques.
• Two out of three readers preferred a vendor-agnostic deep learning post-processing algorithm in comparison to vendor-specific deep learning algorithm and ASiR techniques.
• A vendor-specific deep learning reconstruction algorithm yielded the least image noise, but showed significantly more frequent specific distortion artifacts and increased skewness of attenuation compared to a vendor-agnostic algorithm.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Aberle DR, Adams AM et al (2011) Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365:395–409 National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Aberle DR, Adams AM et al (2011) Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365:395–409
2.
go back to reference Horeweg N, Van der Aalst CM, Vielgenthart R et al (2013) Volumetric computed tomography screening for lung cancer: three rounds of the NELSON trial. Eur Respir J 42:1659-1667 Horeweg N, Van der Aalst CM, Vielgenthart R et al (2013) Volumetric computed tomography screening for lung cancer: three rounds of the NELSON trial. Eur Respir J 42:1659-1667
3.
go back to reference Dominioni L, Poli A, Mantovani W et al (2013) Assessment of lung cancer mortality reduction after chest X-ray screening in smokers: a population-based cohort study in Varese, Italy. Lung Cancer 80:50–54CrossRef Dominioni L, Poli A, Mantovani W et al (2013) Assessment of lung cancer mortality reduction after chest X-ray screening in smokers: a population-based cohort study in Varese, Italy. Lung Cancer 80:50–54CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Mettler FA Jr, Mahesh M, Bhargavan-Chatfield M et al (2020) Patient exposure from radiologic and nuclear medicine procedures in the United States: procedure volume and effective dose for the period 2006–2016. Radiology 295:418–427CrossRef Mettler FA Jr, Mahesh M, Bhargavan-Chatfield M et al (2020) Patient exposure from radiologic and nuclear medicine procedures in the United States: procedure volume and effective dose for the period 2006–2016. Radiology 295:418–427CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Bach PB, Mirkin JN, Oliver TK et al (2012) Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA 307:2418–2429CrossRef Bach PB, Mirkin JN, Oliver TK et al (2012) Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA 307:2418–2429CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M (2008) Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 248:254–263CrossRef Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M (2008) Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 248:254–263CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Messerli M, Kluckert T, Knitel M et al (2017) Ultralow dose CT for pulmonary nodule detection with chest x-ray equivalent dose–a prospective intra-individual comparative study. Eur Radiol 27:3290–3299CrossRef Messerli M, Kluckert T, Knitel M et al (2017) Ultralow dose CT for pulmonary nodule detection with chest x-ray equivalent dose–a prospective intra-individual comparative study. Eur Radiol 27:3290–3299CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Kim Y, Kim YK, Lee BE et al (2015) Ultra-low-dose CT of the thorax using iterative reconstruction: evaluation of image quality and radiation dose reduction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:1197–1202 Kim Y, Kim YK, Lee BE et al (2015) Ultra-low-dose CT of the thorax using iterative reconstruction: evaluation of image quality and radiation dose reduction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:1197–1202
9.
go back to reference Huber A, Landau J, Ebner L et al (2016) Performance of ultralow-dose CT with iterative reconstruction in lung cancer screening: limiting radiation exposure to the equivalent of conventional chest X-ray imaging. Eur Radiol 26:3643–3652CrossRef Huber A, Landau J, Ebner L et al (2016) Performance of ultralow-dose CT with iterative reconstruction in lung cancer screening: limiting radiation exposure to the equivalent of conventional chest X-ray imaging. Eur Radiol 26:3643–3652CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Sui X, Meinel FG, Song W et al (2016) Detection and size measurements of pulmonary nodules in ultra-low-dose CT with iterative reconstruction compared to low dose CT. Eur J Radiol 85:564–570CrossRef Sui X, Meinel FG, Song W et al (2016) Detection and size measurements of pulmonary nodules in ultra-low-dose CT with iterative reconstruction compared to low dose CT. Eur J Radiol 85:564–570CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Schaal M, Severac F, Labani A, Jeung M-Y, Roy C, Ohana M (2016) Diagnostic performance of ultra-low-dose computed tomography for detecting asbestos-related pleuropulmonary diseases: prospective study in a screening setting. PLoS One 11(12):e0168979CrossRef Schaal M, Severac F, Labani A, Jeung M-Y, Roy C, Ohana M (2016) Diagnostic performance of ultra-low-dose computed tomography for detecting asbestos-related pleuropulmonary diseases: prospective study in a screening setting. PLoS One 11(12):e0168979CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Rob S, Bryant T, Wilson I, Somani B (2017) Ultra-low-dose, low-dose, and standard-dose CT of the kidney, ureters, and bladder: is there a difference? Results from a systematic review of the literature. Clin Radiol 72:11–15CrossRef Rob S, Bryant T, Wilson I, Somani B (2017) Ultra-low-dose, low-dose, and standard-dose CT of the kidney, ureters, and bladder: is there a difference? Results from a systematic review of the literature. Clin Radiol 72:11–15CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Hosny A, Parmar C, Quackenbush J, Schwartz LH, Aerts HJ (2018) Artificial intelligence in radiology. Nat Rev Cancer 18:500–510CrossRef Hosny A, Parmar C, Quackenbush J, Schwartz LH, Aerts HJ (2018) Artificial intelligence in radiology. Nat Rev Cancer 18:500–510CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Hsieh J, Liu E, Nett B, Tang J, Thibault J-B, Sahney S (2019) A new era of image reconstruction: TrueFidelity™. White Paper (JB68676XX), GE Healthcare Hsieh J, Liu E, Nett B, Tang J, Thibault J-B, Sahney S (2019) A new era of image reconstruction: TrueFidelity™. White Paper (JB68676XX), GE Healthcare
15.
go back to reference Park HS, Kim JH (2019) Apparatus and method for ct image denoising based on deep learning. Google Patents Park HS, Kim JH (2019) Apparatus and method for ct image denoising based on deep learning. Google Patents
16.
go back to reference Ahn C, Heo C, Kim JH (2019) Combined low-dose simulation and deep learning for CT denoising: application in ultra-low-dose chest CTInternational Forum on Medical Imaging in Asia 2019. International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp 110500E Ahn C, Heo C, Kim JH (2019) Combined low-dose simulation and deep learning for CT denoising: application in ultra-low-dose chest CTInternational Forum on Medical Imaging in Asia 2019. International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp 110500E
17.
go back to reference Hong JH, Park E-A, Lee W, Ahn C, Kim J-H (2020) Incremental image noise reduction in coronary CT angiography using a deep learning-based technique with iterative reconstruction. Korean J Radiol 21(10):1165–1177CrossRef Hong JH, Park E-A, Lee W, Ahn C, Kim J-H (2020) Incremental image noise reduction in coronary CT angiography using a deep learning-based technique with iterative reconstruction. Korean J Radiol 21(10):1165–1177CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Kolb M, Storz C, Kim JH et al (2019) Effect of a novel denoising technique on image quality and diagnostic accuracy in low-dose CT in patients with suspected appendicitis. Eur J Radiol 116:198–204CrossRef Kolb M, Storz C, Kim JH et al (2019) Effect of a novel denoising technique on image quality and diagnostic accuracy in low-dose CT in patients with suspected appendicitis. Eur J Radiol 116:198–204CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Lim WH, Choi YH, Park JE et al (2019) Application of vendor-neutral iterative reconstruction technique to pediatric abdominal computed tomography. Korean J Radiol 20:1358–1367CrossRef Lim WH, Choi YH, Park JE et al (2019) Application of vendor-neutral iterative reconstruction technique to pediatric abdominal computed tomography. Korean J Radiol 20:1358–1367CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Fan J, Yue M, Melnyk R (2014) Benefits of ASiR-V reconstruction for reducing patient radiation dose and preserving diagnostic quality in CT exams (White Paper). WI: GE Healthcare Fan J, Yue M, Melnyk R (2014) Benefits of ASiR-V reconstruction for reducing patient radiation dose and preserving diagnostic quality in CT exams (White Paper). WI: GE Healthcare
21.
go back to reference Weis M, Henzler T, Nance JW Jr et al (2017) Radiation dose comparison between 70 kvp and 100 kVp with spectral beam shaping for non–contrast-enhanced pediatric chest computed tomography: a prospective randomized controlled study. Invest Radiol 52:155–162CrossRef Weis M, Henzler T, Nance JW Jr et al (2017) Radiation dose comparison between 70 kvp and 100 kVp with spectral beam shaping for non–contrast-enhanced pediatric chest computed tomography: a prospective randomized controlled study. Invest Radiol 52:155–162CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Abadi E, Sanders J, Samei E (2017) Patient-specific quantification of image quality: an automated technique for measuring the distribution of organ Hounsfield units in clinical chest CT images. Med Phys 44:4736–4746CrossRef Abadi E, Sanders J, Samei E (2017) Patient-specific quantification of image quality: an automated technique for measuring the distribution of organ Hounsfield units in clinical chest CT images. Med Phys 44:4736–4746CrossRef
23.
go back to reference McClellan TR, Motosugi U, Middleton MS et al (2017) Intravenous gadoxetate disodium administration reduces breath-holding capacity in the hepatic arterial phase: a multi-center randomized placebo-controlled trial. Radiology 282(2):361–368CrossRef McClellan TR, Motosugi U, Middleton MS et al (2017) Intravenous gadoxetate disodium administration reduces breath-holding capacity in the hepatic arterial phase: a multi-center randomized placebo-controlled trial. Radiology 282(2):361–368CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Deak PD, Smal Y, Kalender WA (2010) Multisection CT protocols: sex-and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology 257:158–166CrossRef Deak PD, Smal Y, Kalender WA (2010) Multisection CT protocols: sex-and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology 257:158–166CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Svahn TM, Sjöberg T, Ast JC (2019) Dose estimation of ultra-low-dose chest CT to different sized adult patients. Eur Radiol 29:4315–4323CrossRef Svahn TM, Sjöberg T, Ast JC (2019) Dose estimation of ultra-low-dose chest CT to different sized adult patients. Eur Radiol 29:4315–4323CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Ludwig M, Chipon E, Cohen J et al (2019) Detection of pulmonary nodules: a clinical study protocol to compare ultra-low dose chest CT and standard low-dose CT using ASIR-V. BMJ Open 9:e025661CrossRef Ludwig M, Chipon E, Cohen J et al (2019) Detection of pulmonary nodules: a clinical study protocol to compare ultra-low dose chest CT and standard low-dose CT using ASIR-V. BMJ Open 9:e025661CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Hata A, Yanagawa M, Honda O, Miyata T, Tomiyama N (2019) Ultra-low-dose chest computed tomography for interstitial lung disease using model-based iterative reconstruction with or without the lung setting. Medicine (Baltmore) 98(22):e15936 Hata A, Yanagawa M, Honda O, Miyata T, Tomiyama N (2019) Ultra-low-dose chest computed tomography for interstitial lung disease using model-based iterative reconstruction with or without the lung setting. Medicine (Baltmore) 98(22):e15936
28.
go back to reference Gordic S, Morsbach F, Schmidt B et al (2014) Ultralow-dose chest computed tomography for pulmonary nodule detection: first performance evaluation of single energy scanning with spectral shaping. Invest Radiol 49:465–473CrossRef Gordic S, Morsbach F, Schmidt B et al (2014) Ultralow-dose chest computed tomography for pulmonary nodule detection: first performance evaluation of single energy scanning with spectral shaping. Invest Radiol 49:465–473CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Neroladaki A, Botsikas D, Boudabbous S, Becker CD, Montet X (2013) Computed tomography of the chest with model-based iterative reconstruction using a radiation exposure similar to chest X-ray examination: preliminary observations. Eur Radiol 23:360–366CrossRef Neroladaki A, Botsikas D, Boudabbous S, Becker CD, Montet X (2013) Computed tomography of the chest with model-based iterative reconstruction using a radiation exposure similar to chest X-ray examination: preliminary observations. Eur Radiol 23:360–366CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Botelho MPF, Agrawal R, Gonzalez-Guindalini FD et al (2013) Effect of radiation dose and iterative reconstruction on lung lesion conspicuity at MDCT: does one size fit all? Eur J Radiol 82:e726–e733CrossRef Botelho MPF, Agrawal R, Gonzalez-Guindalini FD et al (2013) Effect of radiation dose and iterative reconstruction on lung lesion conspicuity at MDCT: does one size fit all? Eur J Radiol 82:e726–e733CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Ernst CW, Basten IA, Ilsen B et al (2014) Pulmonary disease in cystic fibrosis: assessment with chest CT at chest radiography dose levels. Radiology 273:597–605CrossRef Ernst CW, Basten IA, Ilsen B et al (2014) Pulmonary disease in cystic fibrosis: assessment with chest CT at chest radiography dose levels. Radiology 273:597–605CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Image quality of ultralow-dose chest CT using deep learning techniques: potential superiority of vendor-agnostic post-processing over vendor-specific techniques
Authors
Ju Gang Nam
Chulkyun Ahn
Hyewon Choi
Wonju Hong
Jongsoo Park
Jong Hyo Kim
Jin Mo Goo
Publication date
01-07-2021
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 7/2021
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07537-7

Other articles of this Issue 7/2021

European Radiology 7/2021 Go to the issue