Kerber Bjarne, Ensle Falko, Kroschke Jonas, Strappa Cecilia, Larici Anna Rita, Frauenfelder Thomas, Jungblut Lisa
From the Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, University Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland (B.K., F.E., J.K., T.F., L.J.); Advanced Radiology Center, Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Oncological Radiotherapy, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy (C.S., A.R.L.); and Section of Radiology, Department of Radiological and Hematological Sciences, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy (A.R.L.).
Invest Radiol. 2025 Apr 1;60(4):291-298. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000001128. Epub 2024 Oct 10.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of visual scoring, low-attenuation volume (LAV), and deep learning methods for estimating emphysema extent in x-ray dose photon-counting detector computed tomography (PCD-CT), aiming to explore future dose reduction potentials.
One hundred one prospectively enrolled patients underwent noncontrast low- and chest x-ray dose CT scans in the same study using PCD-CT. Overall image quality, sharpness, and noise, as well as visual emphysema pattern (no, trace, mild, moderate, confluent, and advanced destructive emphysema; as defined by the Fleischner Society), were independently assessed by 2 experienced radiologists for low- and x-ray dose images, followed by an expert consensus read. In the second step, automated emphysema quantification was performed using an established LAV algorithm with a threshold of -950 HU and a commercially available deep learning model for automated emphysema quantification. Automated estimations of emphysema extent were converted and compared with visual scoring ratings.
X-ray dose scans exhibited a significantly lower computed tomography dose index than low-dose scans (low-dose: 0.66 ± 0.16 mGy, x-ray dose: 0.11 ± 0.03 mGy, P < 0.001). Interreader agreement between low- and x-ray dose for visual emphysema scoring was excellent (κ = 0.83). Visual emphysema scoring consensus showed good agreement between low-dose and x-ray dose scans (κ = 0.70), with significant and strong correlation (Spearman ρ = 0.79). Although trace emphysema was underestimated in x-ray dose scans, there was no significant difference in the detection of higher-grade (mild to advanced destructive) emphysema ( P = 0.125) between the 2 scan doses. Although predicted emphysema volumes on x-ray dose scans for the LAV method showed strong and the deep learning model excellent significant correlations with predictions on low-dose scans, both methods significantly overestimated emphysema volumes on lower quality scans ( P < 0.001), with the deep learning model being more robust. Further, deep learning emphysema severity estimations showed higher agreement (κ = 0.65) and correlation (Spearman ρ = 0.64) with visual scoring for low-dose scans than LAV predictions (κ = 0.48, Spearman ρ = 0.45).
The severity of emphysema can be reliably estimated using visual scoring on CT scans performed with x-ray equivalent doses on a PCD-CT. A deep learning algorithm demonstrated good agreement and strong correlation with the visual scoring method on low-dose scans. However, both the deep learning and LAV algorithms overestimated emphysema extent on x-ray dose scans. Nonetheless, x-ray equivalent radiation dose scans may revolutionize the detection and monitoring of disease in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients.
本研究旨在评估视觉评分、低衰减体积(LAV)和深度学习方法在X线剂量光子计数探测器计算机断层扫描(PCD-CT)中估计肺气肿程度的可行性和有效性,以探索未来的剂量降低潜力。
101例前瞻性入组患者在同一研究中使用PCD-CT进行了非增强低剂量和胸部X线剂量CT扫描。由2名经验丰富的放射科医生对低剂量和X线剂量图像的整体图像质量、清晰度和噪声以及视觉肺气肿模式(无、微量、轻度、中度、融合和重度破坏性肺气肿;由 Fleischner 学会定义)进行独立评估,随后进行专家共识解读。第二步,使用既定的LAV算法(阈值为-950 HU)和商用深度学习模型进行自动肺气肿定量分析。将肺气肿程度的自动估计值进行转换,并与视觉评分等级进行比较。
X线剂量扫描的计算机断层扫描剂量指数显著低于低剂量扫描(低剂量:0.66±0.16 mGy,X线剂量:0.11±0.03 mGy,P<0.001)。低剂量和X线剂量的视觉肺气肿评分的阅片者间一致性良好(κ=0.83)。视觉肺气肿评分共识显示低剂量和X线剂量扫描之间具有良好的一致性(κ=0.70),具有显著且强的相关性(Spearman ρ=0.79)。尽管在X线剂量扫描中微量肺气肿被低估,但在两种扫描剂量之间,更高等级(轻度至重度破坏性)肺气肿的检测无显著差异(P=0.125)。尽管LAV方法在X线剂量扫描上预测的肺气肿体积与低剂量扫描上的预测显示出强相关性,且深度学习模型具有优异的显著相关性,但两种方法在较低质量扫描上均显著高估了肺气肿体积(P<0.001),深度学习模型更稳健。此外,深度学习肺气肿严重程度估计与低剂量扫描的视觉评分相比,显示出更高的一致性(κ=0.65)和相关性(Spearman ρ=0.64),高于LAV预测(κ=0.48,Spearman ρ=0.45)。
在PCD-CT上使用与X线等效剂量进行的CT扫描,通过视觉评分可以可靠地估计肺气肿的严重程度。深度学习算法在低剂量扫描上与视觉评分方法显示出良好的一致性和强相关性。然而,深度学习和LAV算法在X线剂量扫描上均高估了肺气肿程度。尽管如此,与X线等效辐射剂量的扫描可能会彻底改变慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者疾病的检测和监测。