Superior objective and subjective image quality of deep learning reconstruction for low-dose abdominal CT imaging in comparison with model-based iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to conduct objective and subjective comparisons of image quality among abdominal computed tomography (CT) reconstructions with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) algorithms, model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), and filtered back projection (FBP). METHODS: Datasets from consecutive patients who underwent low-dose liver CT were retrospectively identified. Images were reconstructed using DLR, MBIR, and FBP. Mean image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated, and noise, artifacts, sharpness, and overall image quality were subjectively assessed. Dunnett's test was used for statistical comparisons. RESULTS: Ninety patients (67 ± 12.7 years; 63 males; mean body mass index [BMI], 25.5 kg/m2) were included. The mean noise in the abdominal aorta and hepatic parenchyma of DLR was lower than that in FBP and MBIR (p < .001). For FBP and MBIR, image noise was significantly higher for obese patients than for those with normal BMI. The CNR for the abdominal aorta and hepatic parenchyma was higher for DLR than for FBP and MBIR (p < .001). MBIR images were subjectively rated as superior to FBP images in terms of noise, artifacts, sharpness, and overall quality (p < .001). DLR images were rated as superior to MBIR images in terms of noise (p < .001) and overall quality (p = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Based on objective and subjective comparisons, the image quality of DLR was found to be superior to that of MBIR and FBP on low-dose abdominal CT. DLR was the only method for which image noise was not higher for obese patients than for those with a normal BMI. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study provides previously unavailable information on the properties of DLR systems and their clinical utility.

Feasibility of thin-slice abdominal CT in overweight patients using a vendor neutral image-based denoising algorithm: Assessment of image noise, contrast, and quality.

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the novel image-based noise reduction software (NRS) improves image quality, and to assess the feasibility of using this software in combination with hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR) in image quality on thin-slice abdominal CT. In this retrospective study, 54 patients who underwent dynamic liver CT between April and July 2017 and had a body mass index higher than 25 kg/m2 were included. Three image sets of each patient were reconstructed as follows: hybrid IR images with 1-mm slice thickness (group A), hybrid IR images with 5-mm slice thickness (group B), and hybrid IR images with 1-mm slice thickness denoised using NRS (group C). The mean image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio relative to the muscle of the aorta and liver were assessed. Subjective image quality was evaluated by two radiologists for sharpness, noise, contrast, and overall quality using 5-point scales. The mean image noise was significantly lower in group C than in group A (p < 0.01), but no significant difference was observed between groups B and C. The contrast-to-noise ratio was significantly higher in group C than in group A (p < 0.01 and p = 0.01, respectively). Subjective image quality was also significantly higher in group C than in group A (p < 0.01), in terms of noise and overall quality, but not in terms of sharpness and contrast (p = 0.65 and 0.07, respectively). The contrast of images in group C was greater than that in group A, but this difference was not significant. Compared with hybrid IR alone, the novel NRS combined with a hybrid IR could result in significant noise reduction without sacrificing image quality on CT. This combined approach will likely be particularly useful for thin-slice abdominal CT examinations of overweight patients.

Selection of peripheral intravenous catheters with 24-gauge side-holes versus those with 22-gauge end-hole for MDCT: A prospective randomized study.

PURPOSE: To compare the 24-gauge side-holes catheter and conventional 22-gauge end-hole catheter in terms of safety, injection pressure, and contrast enhancement on multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT). MATERIALS & METHODS: In a randomized single-center study, 180 patients were randomized to either the 24-gauge side-holes catheter or the 22-gauge end-hole catheter groups. The primary endpoint was safety during intravenous administration of contrast material for MDCT, using a non-inferiority analysis (lower limit 95% CI greater than -10% non-inferiority margin for the group difference). The secondary endpoints were injection pressure and contrast enhancement. RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were analyzed for safety during intravenous contrast material administration for MDCT. The overall extravasation rate was 1.1% (2/174 patients); 1 (1.2%) minor episode occurred in the 24-gauge side-holes catheter group and 1 (1.1%) in the 22-gauge end-hole catheter group (difference: 0.1%, 95% CI: -3.17% to 3.28%, non-inferiority P=1). The mean maximum pressure was higher with the 24-gauge side-holes catheter than with the 22-gauge end-hole catheter (8.16±0.95kg/cm2 vs. 4.79±0.63kg/cm2, P<0.001). The mean contrast enhancement of the abdominal aorta, celiac artery, superior mesenteric artery, and pancreatic parenchyma in the two groups were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, our study showed that the 24-gauge side-holes catheter is safe and suitable for delivering iodine with a concentration of 300mg/mL at a flow-rate of 3mL/s, and it may contribute to the care of some patients, such as patients who have fragile and small veins. (Trial registration: UMIN000023727).