Suppr超能文献

用于计算机断层扫描中碘浓度质量评估的深度学习图像重建:一项体模研究。

Deep learning image reconstruction for quality assessment of iodine concentration in computed tomography: A phantom study.

作者信息

Jeon Pil-Hyun, Lee Chang-Lae

机构信息

Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Wonju-Si, Gangwon-Do, Republic of Korea.

Health & Medical Equipment Business Unit, Samsung Electronics, Suwon-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

J Xray Sci Technol. 2023;31(2):409-422. doi: 10.3233/XST-221356.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recently, deep learning reconstruction (DLR) technology aiming to improve image quality with minimal radiation dose has been applied not only to pediatric scans, but also to computed tomography angiography (CTA).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate image quality characteristics of filtered back projection (FBP), hybrid iterative reconstruction [Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D)], and DLR (AiCE) using different iodine concentrations and scan parameters.

METHODS

Phantoms with eight iodine concentrations (ranging from 1.2 to 25.9 mg/mL) located at the edge of a cylindrical water phantom with a diameter of 19 cm were scanned. Data were reconstructed with FBP, AIDR 3D, and AiCE using various scan parameters of tube current and voltage using a 320 row-detector CT scanner. Data obtained using different reconstruction techniques were quantitatively compared by analyzing Hounsfield units (HU), noise, and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs).

RESULTS

HU values of FBP and AIDR 3D were constant even when the iodine concentration was changed, whereas AiCE showed the highest HU value when the iodine concentration was low, but the HU value reversed when the iodine concentration exceeded a certain value. In the AIDR 3D and AiCE, the noise decreased as the tube current increased, and the change in noise when the iodine concentration was inconsistent. AIDR 3D and AiCE yielded better noise reduction rates than with FBP at a low tube current. The noise reduction rate of AIDR 3D and AiCE compared to that of FBP showed characteristics ranging from 7% to 35%, and the noise reduction rate of AiCE compared to that of AIDR 3D ranged from 2.0% to 13.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

The evaluated reconstruction techniques showed different image quality characteristics (HU value, noise, and CNR) according to dose and scan parameters, and users must consider these results and characteristics before performing patient scans.

摘要

背景

近年来,旨在用最小辐射剂量提高图像质量的深度学习重建(DLR)技术不仅已应用于儿科扫描,还应用于计算机断层血管造影(CTA)。

目的

使用不同碘浓度和扫描参数评估滤波反投影(FBP)、混合迭代重建[自适应迭代剂量降低3D(AIDR 3D)]和DLR(AiCE)的图像质量特征。

方法

对位于直径19厘米的圆柱形水体模边缘的具有八种碘浓度(范围为1.2至25.9毫克/毫升)的体模进行扫描。使用320排探测器CT扫描仪,利用管电流和电压的各种扫描参数,用FBP、AIDR 3D和AiCE重建数据。通过分析亨氏单位(HU)、噪声和对比噪声比(CNR),对使用不同重建技术获得的数据进行定量比较。

结果

即使碘浓度改变,FBP和AIDR 3D的HU值仍保持恒定,而AiCE在碘浓度较低时HU值最高,但当碘浓度超过一定值时HU值会反转。在AIDR 3D和AiCE中,噪声随着管电流增加而降低,且碘浓度不一致时噪声变化情况不同。在低管电流时,AIDR 3D和AiCE比FBP产生更好的降噪率。AIDR 3D和AiCE与FBP相比的降噪率在7%至35%之间,AiCE与AIDR 3D相比的降噪率在2.0%至13.3%之间。

结论

所评估的重建技术根据剂量和扫描参数显示出不同的图像质量特征(HU值、噪声和CNR),用户在对患者进行扫描前必须考虑这些结果和特征。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验