Energy-integrating detector based ultra-high-resolution CT with deep learning reconstruction for the assessment of calcified lesions in coronary artery disease.

Misato Sone, Makoto Orii, Yoshitaka Ota, Takuya Chiba, Joanne D Schuijf, Naruomi Akino, Kunihiro Yoshioka
{"title":"Energy-integrating detector based ultra-high-resolution CT with deep learning reconstruction for the assessment of calcified lesions in coronary artery disease.","authors":"Misato Sone, Makoto Orii, Yoshitaka Ota, Takuya Chiba, Joanne D Schuijf, Naruomi Akino, Kunihiro Yoshioka","doi":"10.1016/j.jcct.2024.09.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study to compare of the image quality of calcified lesions in coronary artery disease between deep learning reconstruction (DLR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) on energy-integrating detector (EID) based ultra-high-resolution CT (UHRCT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a phantom study on EID-based UHRCT using a dedicated insert for calcifications and obtained the derivative values for DLR and MBIR. In the clinical study, the derivative values were compared between DLR and MBIR across 73 calcified lesions in 62 patients. Edge sharpness of calcifications and contrast resolution at the coronary lumen side were quantified by the maximum and minimum derivative values. Two radiologists independently analyzed image quality of the calcified lesions using a 5-point Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the phantom study, the edge sharpness of the 3-mm calcifications on DLR (median, 924 HU/mm; IQR, 580-1741 HU/mm) was significantly higher than on MBIR (median, 835 HU/mm; IQR, 484-1552; p ​< ​0.001). In the clinical study, the image quality of the calcified lesions was significantly better on DLR with significantly reduced reconstruction time (p ​< ​0.001). The contrast resolution at the coronary lumen side on DLR (median, -99.1 HU/mm; IQR, -209 to -34.3 HU/mm) was significantly higher than on MBIR (median, -41.8 HU/mm; IQR, -121 to 22.3 HU/mm, p ​< ​0.001) although the edge sharpness of calcifications was similar between DLR and MBIR (p ​= ​0.794) in the clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EID-based UHRCT reconstructed using DLR represents better image quality of calcified lesions in coronary artery disease compared with MBIR, with significantly reduced reconstruction time.</p>","PeriodicalId":94071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2024.09.014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study to compare of the image quality of calcified lesions in coronary artery disease between deep learning reconstruction (DLR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) on energy-integrating detector (EID) based ultra-high-resolution CT (UHRCT).

Methods: We performed a phantom study on EID-based UHRCT using a dedicated insert for calcifications and obtained the derivative values for DLR and MBIR. In the clinical study, the derivative values were compared between DLR and MBIR across 73 calcified lesions in 62 patients. Edge sharpness of calcifications and contrast resolution at the coronary lumen side were quantified by the maximum and minimum derivative values. Two radiologists independently analyzed image quality of the calcified lesions using a 5-point Likert scale.

Results: In the phantom study, the edge sharpness of the 3-mm calcifications on DLR (median, 924 HU/mm; IQR, 580-1741 HU/mm) was significantly higher than on MBIR (median, 835 HU/mm; IQR, 484-1552; p ​< ​0.001). In the clinical study, the image quality of the calcified lesions was significantly better on DLR with significantly reduced reconstruction time (p ​< ​0.001). The contrast resolution at the coronary lumen side on DLR (median, -99.1 HU/mm; IQR, -209 to -34.3 HU/mm) was significantly higher than on MBIR (median, -41.8 HU/mm; IQR, -121 to 22.3 HU/mm, p ​< ​0.001) although the edge sharpness of calcifications was similar between DLR and MBIR (p ​= ​0.794) in the clinical setting.

Conclusion: EID-based UHRCT reconstructed using DLR represents better image quality of calcified lesions in coronary artery disease compared with MBIR, with significantly reduced reconstruction time.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于能量积分探测器的超高分辨率 CT 与深度学习重建用于评估冠状动脉疾病的钙化病变。
研究背景本研究旨在比较基于能量积分探测器(EID)的超高分辨率 CT(UHRCT)上深度学习重建(DLR)和基于模型的迭代重建(MBIR)对冠状动脉疾病钙化病变的成像质量:我们使用钙化专用插入物对基于 EID 的 UHRCT 进行了模型研究,并获得了 DLR 和 MBIR 的导数值。在临床研究中,我们对 62 名患者的 73 个钙化病灶的 DLR 和 MBIR 的导数值进行了比较。钙化的边缘锐利度和冠状动脉管腔侧的对比分辨率通过最大和最小导数值进行量化。两名放射科医生使用 5 点李克特量表独立分析了钙化病变的图像质量:结果:在模型研究中,DLR(中位数,924 HU/mm;IQR,580-1741 HU/mm)上 3 毫米钙化的边缘锐利度明显高于 MBIR(中位数,835 HU/mm;IQR,484-1552;P 结论:与 MBIR 相比,使用 DLR 重建的基于 EID 的 UHRCT 对冠状动脉疾病钙化病变的成像质量更好,重建时间也明显缩短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diagnostic performance of CCTA and CTP imaging for clinically suspected in-stent restenosis: A meta-analysis. Cost-effectiveness of ultrahigh-resolution photon-counting detector coronary CT angiography for the evaluation of stable chest pain. Association of coronary inflammation with plaque vulnerability and fractional flow reserve in coronary artery disease. Prognostic value of left ventricular mass measured on coronary computed tomography angiography. Coronary computed tomography angiography for the diagnosis of significant left main coronary artery disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1