Preliminary application of deep learning image reconstruction double-low technique in CT urography

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2022.06.011

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the feasibility of 100 kV deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR) in CT urography (CTU) and compare them with the traditional 120kV adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V (ASIR-V) standard scheme.

Methods

According to the scanning scheme, 60 patients with abdominal CTU enhancement scan were divided into standard plan group (group S) and double low plan group (group L). The contrast dose, volume CT dose index and dose length product of group L and group S were recorded, and the effective dose was calculated. Group S was reconstructed with 60%ASIR-V (S-AV60), and group L was reconstructed with 60%ASIR-V (L-AV60), DLIR-M and DLIR-H. The CT values and standard deviation (SD) of right renal pelvis, right renal parenchyma, left renal pelvis, left renal parenchyma, right ureter, left ureter, bladder and psoas major muscle were measured, and the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. The original axial images, reconstructed volume rendering (VR) images and maximum intensity projection (MIP) images were subjectively scored by two experienced clinicians. t-test was used to compare ED between the two groups. One-way ANOVA was used to analyze the objective evaluation parameters such as CT, SD, SNR and CNR. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze the subjective score of the two radiologists. Kappa test was used to analyze the consistency of subjective scores of the two radiologists.

Results

Compared with group S, the effective dose and contrast dose of group L decreased by 29.1% (P<0.001) and 32.1% (P<0.001), respectively. The SD of DLIR-H group was the lowest and the SNR,CNR was the largest. The independent score and the final image score of the four factors were the highest in the DLIR-H group (P<0.001). The subjective image quality scores of 4 CTU were also consistent among 2 radiologists (Kappa=0.770, P<0.001).

Conclusions

In CT urography (CTU), the double-low technique of DLIR reconstruction can significantly reduce the radiation dose (29.1%) and contrast dose (32.1%). Compared with the 60%ASIR-V standard scheme, DLIR-H can further improve the image quality and is a better reconstruction algorithm.

Key words: Deep learning, Image reconstruction, CT urography, Artificial intelligence(AI)

Yue Zhang, Ke Zhang, Yuefei Guo, Zhuoxin Guo, Zhan'ao Meng. Preliminary application of deep learning image reconstruction double-low technique in CT urography[J]. Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(06): 539-545.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhqjmnmwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2022.06.011

https://zhqjmnmwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2022/V16/I06/539

Figures/Tables 6

References 15

[1]	Li X, Shu H, Zhang Y, et al. Low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for evaluation of urinary stone[J]. Oncotarget, 2018, 9(28): 20103-20111.
[2]	Ren Z, Zhang X, Hu Z, et al. Reducing radiation dose and improving image quality in ct portal venography using 80 kv and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-v in slender patients[J]. Acad Radiol, 2020, 27(2): 233-243.
[3]	Lee HN, Lee SM, Choe J, et al. Diagnostic performance of CT-guided percutaneous transthoracic core needle biopsy using low tube voltage (100 kVp): comparison with conventional tube voltage (120 kVp). Acta Radiol[J]. 2018, 59(4): 425-433.
[4]	Goodenberger MH, Wagner-Bartak NA, Gupta S, et al. Computed tomography image quality evaluation of a new iterative reconstruction algorithm in the abdomen (adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-v) a comparison with model-based iterative reconstruction, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and filtered back projection reconstructions[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2018, 42(2): 184-190.
[5]	Park C, Choo KS, Kim JH, et al. Image quality and radiation dose in ct venography using model-based iterative reconstruction at 80 kvp versus adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-Vat 70 kVp[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2019, 20(7): 1167-1175.
[6]	Goodenberger MH, Wagner-Bartak NA, Gupta S, et al. Computed tomography image quality evaluation of a new iterative reconstruction algorithm in the abdomen (adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-v) a comparison with model-based iterative reconstruction, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and filtered back projection reconstructions[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2018, 42(2): 184-190.
[7]	Laurent G, Villani N, Hossu G, et al. Full model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) in abdominal CT increases objective image quality, but decreases subjective acceptance[J]. Eur Radiol, 2019, 29(8): 4016-4025.
[8]	Jensen CT, Liu X, Tamm EP, et al. Image quality assessment of abdominal ct by use of new deep learning image reconstruction: initial experience[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2020, 215(1): 50-57.
[9]	Hwang I, Cho JY, Kim SY, et al. Low tube voltage computed tomography urography using low-concentration contrast media: Comparison of image quality in conventional computed tomography urography[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2015, 84(12): 2454-2463.
[10]	Kim SY, Cho JY, Lee J, et al. Low-Tube-Voltage CT urography using low-concentration-iodine contrast media and iterative reconstruction: a multi-institutional randomized controlled trial for comparison with conventional CT urography[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2018, 19(6): 1119-1129.
[11]	Kwon H, Cho J, Oh J, et al. The adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V technique for radiation dose reduction in abdominal CT: comparison with the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique[J]. Br J Radiol, 2015, 88(1054): 20150463.
[12]	Arndt C, Güttler F, Heinrich A, et al. Deep learning ct image reconstruction in clinical practice[J]. Rofo, 2021, 193(3): 252-261.
[13]	Willemink MJ, Noël PB. The evolution of image reconstruction for CT-from filtered back projection to artificial intelligence[J]. Eur Radiol, 2019, 29(5): 2185-2195.
[14]	Kim JH, Yoon HJ, Lee E, et al. Validation of deep-learning image reconstruction for low-dose chest computed tomography scan: emphasis on image quality and noise[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2021, 22(1): 131-138.
[15]	王甜, 曹治婷, 韩秋丽. 低管电压联合低剂量对比剂在肺动脉CT成像中的应用[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2016, 32(15): 2532-2534.

组别	例数	性别(例)		年龄（岁）	身高（cm）	体重（kg）	BMI（kg/m²）	对比剂量（ml）	CTDIvol（mGy）	DLP（mGy·cm）	ED（mSv）
组别	例数	男	女	年龄（岁）	身高（cm）	体重（kg）	BMI（kg/m²）	对比剂量（ml）	CTDIvol（mGy）	DLP（mGy·cm）	ED（mSv）
标准剂量（S）组	30	14	16	50.2±18.27	163.51±6.62	66.19±8.75	24.87±3.87	99.28±13.12	25.05±4.28	1218.11±239.84	18.27±3.60
低剂量（L）组	30	17	13	51.93±19.20	166.93±9.30	67.37±12.57	24.02±2.90	67.37±12.57	16.43±3.83	863.29±282.44	12.95±4.24
统计值		χ² =0.601		t=-0.358	t=-1.64	t=-0.422	t=0.961	t=9.621	t=8.22	t=5.245	t=5.245
P值		0.438		0.721	0.106	0.674	0.341	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	性别(例)		年龄（岁）	身高（cm）	体重（kg）	BMI（kg/m²）	对比剂量（ml）	CTDIvol（mGy）	DLP（mGy·cm）	ED（mSv）
组别	例数	男	女	年龄（岁）	身高（cm）	体重（kg）	BMI（kg/m²）	对比剂量（ml）	CTDIvol（mGy）	DLP（mGy·cm）	ED（mSv）
标准剂量（S）组	30	14	16	50.2±18.27	163.51±6.62	66.19±8.75	24.87±3.87	99.28±13.12	25.05±4.28	1218.11±239.84	18.27±3.60
低剂量（L）组	30	17	13	51.93±19.20	166.93±9.30	67.37±12.57	24.02±2.90	67.37±12.57	16.43±3.83	863.29±282.44	12.95±4.24
统计值		χ² =0.601		t=-0.358	t=-1.64	t=-0.422	t=0.961	t=9.621	t=8.22	t=5.245	t=5.245
P值		0.438		0.721	0.106	0.674	0.341	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	CT值（Hu）					SD值
组别	例数	右肾盂	左肾盂	右输尿管	左输尿管	膀胱	右肾盂	左肾盂
S-AV60	30	983.06±328.53	1022.06±351.61	926.44±316.86	944.63±388.42	732.71±366.29	71.41±11.61	71.12±22.03
L-AV60	30	1285.53±527.87	1277.06±402.30	1291.45±490.11	1254.27±484.89	999.09±458.84	92.47±55.85	109.63±67.75
L-DM	30	1291.91±529.94	1289.36±401.57	1248.36±410.01	1251.14±482.09	1000.38±459.04	85.80±55.50	74.65±62.27
L-DH	30	1292.15±529.98	1289.41±401.67	1273.65±469.81	1251.44±481.84	1000.43±458.98	44.93±22.57	35.87±24.09
F值		4.579	3.425	4.939	3.339	2.797	13.883	18.064
P值		0.006	0.020	0.003	0.022	0.043	<0.001	<0.001
组别	SD值			SNR值
组别	右输尿管	左输尿管	膀胱	右肾盂	左肾盂	右输尿管	左输尿管	膀胱
S-AV60	93.4±25.86	90.92±25.41	46.68±30.31	13.88±3.99	15.79±7.56	10.40±3.84	10.71±4.07	17.22±5.55
L-AV60	164.55±109.47	160.96±107.43	65.93±31.74	16.38±6.95	13.81±6.19	11.89±9.59	11.55±9.18	16.51±7.46
L-DM	104.35±70.92	99.60±72.18	50.64±39.06	19.51±11.81	29.48±21.89	19.89±15.59	21.21±17.34	23.07±12.63
L-DH	58.37±45.66	50.90±36.05	28.56±13.00	33.23±16.66	50.73±32.19	37.22±29.52	37.95±27.33	37.95±20.04
F值	9.789	14.349	15.369	13.962	16.323	11.052	12.514	11.722
P值	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
组别	CNR值
组别	右肾盂	左肾盂	右输尿管	左输尿管	膀胱
S-AV60	89.85±39.59	95.49±49.70	85.39±37.27	87.29±40.15	61.14±33.82
L-AV60	98.23±39.32	105.06±40.87	95.79±33.73	95.95±35.25	59.23±27.38
L-DM	110.24±42.90	119.43±45.29	107.21±37.18	109.19±40.59	68.18±32.82
L-DH	149.36±62.83	160.10±62.62	144.21±51.17	145.43±54.25	91.34±42.29
F值	6.755	9.620	12.085	10.571	5.492
P值	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.001

组别	例数	CT值（Hu）					SD值
组别	例数	右肾盂	左肾盂	右输尿管	左输尿管	膀胱	右肾盂	左肾盂
S-AV60	30	983.06±328.53	1022.06±351.61	926.44±316.86	944.63±388.42	732.71±366.29	71.41±11.61	71.12±22.03
L-AV60	30	1285.53±527.87	1277.06±402.30	1291.45±490.11	1254.27±484.89	999.09±458.84	92.47±55.85	109.63±67.75
L-DM	30	1291.91±529.94	1289.36±401.57	1248.36±410.01	1251.14±482.09	1000.38±459.04	85.80±55.50	74.65±62.27
L-DH	30	1292.15±529.98	1289.41±401.67	1273.65±469.81	1251.44±481.84	1000.43±458.98	44.93±22.57	35.87±24.09
F值		4.579	3.425	4.939	3.339	2.797	13.883	18.064
P值		0.006	0.020	0.003	0.022	0.043	<0.001	<0.001
组别	SD值			SNR值
组别	右输尿管	左输尿管	膀胱	右肾盂	左肾盂	右输尿管	左输尿管	膀胱
S-AV60	93.4±25.86	90.92±25.41	46.68±30.31	13.88±3.99	15.79±7.56	10.40±3.84	10.71±4.07	17.22±5.55
L-AV60	164.55±109.47	160.96±107.43	65.93±31.74	16.38±6.95	13.81±6.19	11.89±9.59	11.55±9.18	16.51±7.46
L-DM	104.35±70.92	99.60±72.18	50.64±39.06	19.51±11.81	29.48±21.89	19.89±15.59	21.21±17.34	23.07±12.63
L-DH	58.37±45.66	50.90±36.05	28.56±13.00	33.23±16.66	50.73±32.19	37.22±29.52	37.95±27.33	37.95±20.04
F值	9.789	14.349	15.369	13.962	16.323	11.052	12.514	11.722
P值	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
组别	CNR值
组别	右肾盂	左肾盂	右输尿管	左输尿管	膀胱
S-AV60	89.85±39.59	95.49±49.70	85.39±37.27	87.29±40.15	61.14±33.82
L-AV60	98.23±39.32	105.06±40.87	95.79±33.73	95.95±35.25	59.23±27.38
L-DM	110.24±42.90	119.43±45.29	107.21±37.18	109.19±40.59	68.18±32.82
L-DH	149.36±62.83	160.10±62.62	144.21±51.17	145.43±54.25	91.34±42.29
F值	6.755	9.620	12.085	10.571	5.492
P值	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.001

	输尿管锐度(清晰度)	管腔噪声	硬线伪影	整体质量	医师1	医师2	Kappa	P值
S-AV60	3.28±0.43^#	3.43±0.43^#	3.83±0.41^#	3.18±0.43^#	3.34±0.18	3.30±0.15	0.704	<0.001
L-AV60	2.47±0.51^#	2.40±0.52^#	2.55±0.58^#	2.93±0.31^#	2.60±0.20	2.58±0.22	0.650	<0.001
L-DM	3.73±0.41^#	3.57±0.49^#	3.72±0.43^#	3.78±0.50^#	3.73±0.27	3.67±0.24	0.596	<0.001
L-DH	4.67±0.48^#	4.62±0.49^#	4.73±0.41^#	4.68±0.44^#	4.68±0.18	4.67±0.19	0.676	<0.001
H值	90.111	85.946	88.748	85.525	107.757	108.595	-	-
P值	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export