Accuracy of two deep learning-based reconstruction methods compared with an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction method for solid and ground-glass nodule volumetry on low-dose and ultra-low-dose chest computed tomography: A phantom study
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 in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2022-06, Vol.17 (6), p.e0270122-e0270122 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | 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 |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
DOI: | 10.1371/journal.pone.0270122 |