Dataset Information

Accuracy of Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction for CT Volumetry of Part-Solid Nodules and Solid Nodules in Comparison with Filtered Back Projection and Hybrid Iterative Reconstruction at Various Dose Settings: An Anthropomorphic Chest Phantom Study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To investigate the accuracy of model-based iterative reconstruction (MIR) for volume measurement of part-solid nodules (PSNs) and solid nodules (SNs) in comparison with filtered back projection (FBP) or hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) at various radiation dose settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS:CT scanning was performed for eight different diameters of PSNs and SNs placed in the phantom at five radiation dose levels (120 kVp/100 mAs, 120 kVp/50 mAs, 120 kVp/20 mAs, 120 kVp/10 mAs, and 80 kVp/10 mAs). Each CT scan was reconstructed using FBP, HIR, or MIR with three different image definitions (body routine level 1 [IMR-R1], body soft tissue level 1 [IMR-ST1], and sharp plus level 1 [IMR-SP1]; Philips Healthcare). The SN and PSN volumes including each solid/ground-glass opacity portion were measured semi-automatically, after which absolute percentage measurement errors (APEs) of the measured volumes were calculated. Image noise was calculated to assess the image quality. RESULTS:Across all nodules and dose settings, the APEs were significantly lower in MIR than in FBP and HIR (all p < 0.01). The APEs of the smallest inner solid portion of the PSNs (3 mm) and SNs (3 mm) were the lowest when MIR (IMR-R1 and IMR-ST1) was used for reconstruction for all radiation dose settings. (IMR-R1 and IMR-ST1 at 120 kVp/100 mAs, 1.06 ± 1.36 and 8.75 ± 3.96, p < 0.001; at 120 kVp/50 mAs, 1.95 ± 1.56 and 5.61 ± 0.85, p = 0.002; at 120 kVp/20 mAs, 2.88 ± 3.68 and 5.75 ± 1.95, p = 0.001; at 120 kVp/10 mAs, 5.57 ± 6.26 and 6.32 ± 2.91, p = 0.091; at 80 kVp/10 mAs, 5.84 ± 1.96 and 6.90 ± 3.31, p = 0.632). Image noise was significantly lower in MIR than in FBP and HIR for all radiation dose settings (120 kVp/100 mAs, 3.22 ± 0.66; 120 kVp/50 mAs, 4.19 ± 1.37; 120 kVp/20 mAs, 5.49 ± 1.16; 120 kVp/10 mAs, 6.88 ± 1.91; 80 kVp/10 mAs, 12.49 ± 6.14; all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION:MIR was the most accurate algorithm for volume measurements of both PSNs and SNs in comparison with FBP and HIR at low-dose as well as standard-dose settings. Specifically, MIR was effective in the volume measurement of the smallest PSNs and SNs.

SUBMITTER: Kim SK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6609437 | biostudies-other | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Accuracy of Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction for CT Volumetry of Part-Solid Nodules and Solid Nodules in Comparison with Filtered Back Projection and Hybrid Iterative Reconstruction at Various Dose Settings: An Anthropomorphic Chest Phantom Study.

Kim Seung Kwan SK Kim Cherry C Lee Ki Yeol KY Cha Jaehyung J Lim Hyun Ju HJ Kang Eun Young EY Oh Yu Whan YW

Korean journal of radiology 20190701 7

<h4>Objective</h4>To investigate the accuracy of model-based iterative reconstruction (MIR) for volume measurement of part-solid nodules (PSNs) and solid nodules (SNs) in comparison with filtered back projection (FBP) or hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) at various radiation dose settings.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>CT scanning was performed for eight different diameters of PSNs and SNs placed in the phantom at five radiation dose levels (120 kVp/100 mAs, 120 kVp/50 mAs, 120 kVp/20 mAs, 12 ...[more]

PMID: 31270983

Similar Datasets

Project description:No published studies have evaluated the accuracy of volumetric measurement of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules on low-dose or ultra-low-dose chest computed tomography, reconstructed using deep learning-based algorithms. This is an important issue in lung cancer screening. Our study aimed to investigate the accuracy of semiautomatic volume measurement of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules, using two deep learning-based image reconstruction algorithms (Truefidelity and ClariCT.AI), compared with iterative reconstruction (ASiR-V) in low-dose and ultra-low-dose settings. We performed computed tomography scans of solid nodules and ground-glass nodules of different diameters placed in a phantom at four radiation doses (120 kVp/220 mA, 120 kVp/90 mA, 120 kVp/40 mA, and 80 kVp/40 mA). Each scan was reconstructed using Truefidelity, ClariCT.AI, and ASiR-V. The solid nodule and ground-glass nodule volumes were measured semiautomatically. The gold-standard volumes could be calculated using the diameter since all nodule phantoms are perfectly spherical. Subsequently, absolute percentage measurement errors of the measured volumes were calculated. Image noise was also calculated. Across all nodules at all dose settings, the absolute percentage measurement errors of Truefidelity and ClariCT.AI were less than 11%; they were significantly lower with Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI than with ASiR-V (all P<0.05). The absolute percentage measurement errors for the smallest solid nodule (3 mm) reconstructed by Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI at all dose settings were significantly lower than those of this nodule reconstructed by ASiR-V (all P<0.05). Furthermore, the lowest absolute percentage measurement errors for ground-glass nodules were observed with Truefidelity or ClariCT.AI at all dose settings. The absolute percentage measurement errors for ground-glass nodules reconstructed with Truefidelity at ultra-low-dose settings were significantly lower than those of all sizes of ground-glass nodules reconstructed with ASiR-V (all P<0.05). Image noise was lowest with Truefidelity (all P<0.05). In conclusion, the deep learning-based algorithms were more accurate for volume measurements of both solid nodules and ground-glass nodules than ASiR-V at both low-dose and ultra-low-dose settings.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare a deep learning-based reconstruction (DLR) algorithm for pediatric abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) with filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms.Materials and methodsPost-contrast abdominopelvic CT scans obtained from 120 pediatric patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 8.7 ± 5.2 years; 60 males) between May 2020 and October 2020 were evaluated in this retrospective study. Images were reconstructed using FBP, a hybrid IR algorithm (ASiR-V) with blending factors of 50% and 100% (AV50 and AV100, respectively), and a DLR algorithm (TrueFidelity) with three strength levels (low, medium, and high). Noise power spectrum (NPS) and edge rise distance (ERD) were used to evaluate noise characteristics and spatial resolution, respectively. Image noise, edge definition, overall image quality, lesion detectability and conspicuity, and artifacts were qualitatively scored by two pediatric radiologists, and the scores of the two reviewers were averaged. A repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by the Bonferroni post-hoc test was used to compare NPS and ERD among the six reconstruction methods. The Friedman rank sum test followed by the Nemenyi-Wilcoxon-Wilcox all-pairs test was used to compare the results of the qualitative visual analysis among the six reconstruction methods.ResultsThe NPS noise magnitude of AV100 was significantly lower than that of the DLR, whereas the NPS peak of AV100 was significantly higher than that of the high- and medium-strength DLR (p < 0.001). The NPS average spatial frequencies were higher for DLR than for ASiR-V (p < 0.001). ERD was shorter with DLR than with ASiR-V and FBP (p < 0.001). Qualitative visual analysis revealed better overall image quality with high-strength DLR than with ASiR-V (p < 0.001).ConclusionFor pediatric abdominopelvic CT, the DLR algorithm may provide improved noise characteristics and better spatial resolution than the hybrid IR algorithm.

Project description:3DVH software (Sun Nuclear Corp., Melbourne, FL) is capable of generating a volumetric patient VMAT dose by applying a volumetric perturbation algorithm based on comparing measurement-guided dose reconstruction and TPS-calculated dose to a cylindrical phantom. The primary purpose of this paper is to validate this dose reconstruction on an anthropomorphic heterogeneous thoracic phantom by direct comparison to independent measurements. The dosimetric insert to the phantom is novel, and thus the secondary goal is to demonstrate how it can be used for the hidden target end-to-end testing of VMAT treatments in lung. A dosimetric insert contains a 4 cm diameter unit-density spherical target located inside the right lung (0.21 g/cm(3) density). It has 26 slots arranged in two orthogonal directions, milled to hold optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLDs). Dose profiles in three cardinal orthogonal directions were obtained for five VMAT plans with varying degrees of modulation. After appropriate OSLD corrections were applied, 3DVH measurement-guided VMAT dose reconstruction agreed 100% with the measurements in the unit density target sphere at 3%/3 mm level (composite analysis) for all profile points for the four less-modulated VMAT plans, and for 96% of the points in the highly modulated C-shape plan (from TG-119). For this latter plan, while 3DVH shows acceptable agreement with independent measurements in the unit density target, in the lung disagreement with experiment is relatively high for both the TPS calculation and 3DVH reconstruction. For the four plans excluding the C-shape, 3%/3 mm overall composite analysis passing rates for 3DVH against independent measurement ranged from 93% to 100%. The C-shape plan was deliberately chosen as a stress test of the algorithm. The dosimetric spatial alignment hidden target test demonstrated the average distance to agreement between the measured and TPS profiles in the steep dose gradient area at the edge of the 2 cm target to be 1.0 ± 0.7, 0.3 ± 0.3, and 0.3 ± 0.3 mm for the IEC X, Y, and Z directions, respectively.

Project description:Background Classification of lung cancer screening CT scans depends on measurement of lung nodule size. Information about interobserver agreement is limited. Purpose To assess interobserver agreement in the measurements and American College of Radiology Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) classifications of solid lung nodules detected at lung cancer screening using manual measurements of average diameter and computer-aided semiautomated measurements of average diameter and volume (CT volumetry). Materials and Methods Two radiologists and one radiology resident retrospectively measured lung nodules from screening CT scans obtained between September 2016 and June 2018 with a Lung-RADS (version 1.0) classification of 2, 3, 4A, or 4B in the clinical setting. Average manual diameter and semiautomated computer-aided diameter and volume measurements were converted to the corresponding Lung-RADS categories. Interobserver agreement in raw measurements was assessed using intraclass correlation and Bland-Altman indexes, and interobserver agreement in Lung-RADS classification was assessed using bi-rater κ. Results One hundred twenty patients (mean age, 63 years ± 6 [standard deviation]; 67 women) were evaluated. All manual, semiautomated diameter, and semiautomated volume measurements were obtained by all three readers in 120 of 147 nodules (82%). Intraclass correlation coefficients were greater than or equal to 0.95 for all reader pairs using all measurement methods and were highest using volumetry. Bias and 95% limits of agreement for average diameter were smaller with semiautomated measurements than with manual measurements. κ values across all Lung-RADS classifications were greater than or equal to 0.81, with the lowest being for manual measurements and the highest being for volumetric measurements. Forty-three of 120 (36%) of the nodules were classified into a lower Lung-RADS category on the basis of volumetry compared with using manual diameter measurements by at least one reader, whereas the reverse occurred for four of 120 (3%) of the nodules. Conclusion Interobserver agreement was high with manual diameter measurements and increased with semiautomated CT volumetric measurements. Semiautomated CT volumetry enabled classification of more nodules into lower Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System categories than manual or semiautomated diameter measurements. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Nishino in this issue.

Dataset Information

Accuracy of Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction for CT Volumetry of Part-Solid Nodules and Solid Nodules in Comparison with Filtered Back Projection and Hybrid Iterative Reconstruction at Various Dose Settings: An Anthropomorphic Chest Phantom Study.

Publications

Accuracy of Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction for CT Volumetry of Part-Solid Nodules and Solid Nodules in Comparison with Filtered Back Projection and Hybrid Iterative Reconstruction at Various Dose Settings: An Anthropomorphic Chest Phantom Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets