ABSTRACT
Objective The study aims to investigate the effects of different adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V（ ASiR-V） and convolution kernel parameters on stability of CT auto-segmentation which is based on deep learning. Method Twenty patients who have received pelvic radiotherapy were selected and different reconstruction parameters were used to establish CT images dataset. Then structures including three soft tissue organs (bladder, bowelbag, small intestine) and five bone organs (left and right femoral head, left and right femur, pelvic) were segmented automatically by deep learning neural network. Performance was evaluated by dice similarity coefficient（ DSC） and Hausdorff distance, using filter back projection(FBP) as the reference. Results Auto-segmentation of deep learning is greatly affected by ASIR-V, but less affected by convolution kernel, especially in soft tissues. Conclusion The stability of auto-segmentation is affected by parameter selection of reconstruction algorithm. In practical application, it is necessary to find a balance between image quality and segmentation quality, or improve segmentation network to enhance the stability of auto-segmentation.
Subject(s)
Humans , Algorithms , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted , Neural Networks, Computer , Radiation Dosage , Tomography, X-Ray ComputedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the objective and subjective image quality indicators and radiation doses of computed tomography (CT) venography performed using model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) at 80 kVp and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR)-V at 70 kVp. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-three patients who had undergone CT venography of the lower extremities with MBIR at 80 kVp (Group A; 21 men and 20 women; mean age, 55.5 years) or ASIR-V at 70 kVp (Group B; 18 men and 24 women; mean age, 57.3 years) were enrolled. Two radiologists retrospectively evaluated the objective (vascular enhancement, image noise, signal-to-noise ratio [SNR], contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR]) and subjective (quantum mottle, delineation of contour, venous enhancement) image quality indicators at the inferior vena cava and femoral and popliteal veins. Clinical information, radiation dose, reconstruction time, and objective and subjective image quality indicators were compared between groups A and B. RESULTS: Vascular enhancement, SNR, and CNR were significantly greater in Group B than in Group A (p ≤ 0.015). Image noise was significantly lower in Group B (p ≤ 0.021), and all subjective image quality indicators, except for delineation of vein contours, were significantly better in Group B (p ≤ 0.021). Mean reconstruction time was significantly shorter in Group B than in Group A (1 min 43 s vs. 131 min 1 s; p < 0.001). Clinical information and radiation dose were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: CT venography using ASIR-V at 70 kVp was better than MBIR at 80 kVp in terms of image quality and reconstruction time at similar radiation doses.