Cao Jinjin, Mroueh Nayla, Lennartz Simon, Mercaldo Nathaniel D, Pisuchpen Nisanard, Kongboonvijit Sasiprang, Srinivas Rao Shravya, Yuenyongsinchai Kampon, Pierce Theodore T, Sertic Madeleine, Chung Ryan, Kambadakone Avinash R
Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, White 270, Boston, MA, 02114-2696, USA.
Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Eur Radiol. 2025 Feb;35(2):885-896. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-10974-3. Epub 2024 Jul 24.
To perform a multi-reader comparison of multiparametric dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) images reconstructed with deep-learning image reconstruction (DLIR) and standard-of-care adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V (ASIR-V).
This retrospective study included 100 patients undergoing portal venous phase abdominal CT on a rapid kVp switching DECT scanner. Six reconstructed DECT sets (ASIR-V and DLIR, each at three strengths) were generated. Each DECT set included 65 keV monoenergetic, iodine, and virtual unenhanced (VUE) images. Using a Likert scale, three radiologists performed qualitative assessments for image noise, contrast, small structure visibility, sharpness, artifact, and image preference. Quantitative assessment was performed by measuring attenuation, image noise, and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR). For the qualitative analysis, Gwet's AC2 estimates were used to assess agreement.
DECT images reconstructed with DLIR yielded better qualitative scores than ASIR-V images except for artifacts, where both groups were comparable. DLIR-H images were rated higher than other reconstructions on all parameters (p-value < 0.05). On quantitative analysis, there was no significant difference in the attenuation values between ASIR-V and DLIR groups. DLIR images had higher CNR values for the liver and portal vein, and lower image noise, compared to ASIR-V images (p-value < 0.05). The subgroup analysis of patients with large body habitus (weight ≥ 90 kg) showed similar results to the study population. Inter-reader agreement was good-to-very good overall.
Multiparametric post-processed DECT datasets reconstructed with DLIR were preferred over ASIR-V images with DLIR-H yielding the highest image quality scores.
Deep-learning image reconstruction in dual-energy CT demonstrated significant benefits in qualitative and quantitative image metrics compared to adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V.
Dual-energy CT (DECT) images reconstructed using deep-learning image reconstruction (DLIR) showed superior qualitative scores compared to adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V (ASIR-V) reconstructed images, except for artifacts where both reconstructions were rated comparable. While there was no significant difference in attenuation values between ASIR-V and DLIR groups, DLIR images showed higher contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) for liver and portal vein, and lower image noise (p value < 0.05). Subgroup analysis of patients with large body habitus (weight ≥ 90 kg) yielded similar findings to the overall study population.
对采用深度学习图像重建(DLIR)和标准护理自适应统计迭代重建-V(ASIR-V)重建的多参数双能计算机断层扫描(DECT)图像进行多阅片者比较。
这项回顾性研究纳入了100例在快速千伏切换DECT扫描仪上进行门静脉期腹部CT检查的患者。生成了六组重建的DECT数据集(ASIR-V和DLIR,每组三种强度)。每组DECT数据集包括65keV单能、碘和虚拟平扫(VUE)图像。三位放射科医生使用李克特量表对图像噪声、对比度、小结构可见性、清晰度、伪影和图像偏好进行定性评估。通过测量衰减、图像噪声和对比度噪声比(CNR)进行定量评估。对于定性分析,使用Gwet's AC2估计值来评估一致性。
除伪影方面两组相当外,DLIR重建的DECT图像定性评分优于ASIR-V图像。DLIR-H图像在所有参数上的评分均高于其他重建图像(p值<0.05)。在定量分析中,ASIR-V组和DLIR组的衰减值无显著差异。与ASIR-V图像相比,DLIR图像的肝脏和门静脉CNR值更高,图像噪声更低(p值<0.05)。对体型较大(体重≥90kg)患者的亚组分析结果与研究总体相似。阅片者之间的一致性总体良好至极优。
与ASIR-V图像相比,DLIR重建的多参数后处理DECT数据集更受青睐,其中DLIR-H的图像质量评分最高。
与自适应统计迭代重建-V相比,双能CT中的深度学习图像重建在定性和定量图像指标方面显示出显著优势。
与自适应统计迭代重建-V(ASIR-V)重建图像相比,使用深度学习图像重建(DLIR)重建的双能CT(DECT)图像在定性评分上更优,除伪影方面两组评分相当。虽然ASIR-V组和DLIR组的衰减值无显著差异,但DLIR图像的肝脏和门静脉对比度噪声比(CNR)更高,图像噪声更低(p值<0.05)。对体型较大(体重≥90kg)患者的亚组分析结果与研究总体相似。