4.6 Article

Deep Learning-Based Image Reconstruction for CT Angiography of the Aorta

Journal

DIAGNOSTICS
Volume 11, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11112037

Keywords

deep learning; image processing; angiography; computed tomography; aorta

Funding

  1. GE Healthcare

Ask authors/readers for more resources

By analyzing the image quality of aortic CT angiography, it was found that the DLIR algorithm can significantly reduce image noise, improve SNR and CNR compared to ASIR-V, and the subjective image quality has also been significantly improved.
To evaluate the impact of a novel, deep-learning-based image reconstruction (DLIR) algorithm on image quality in CT angiography of the aorta, we retrospectively analyzed 51 consecutive patients who underwent ECG-gated chest CT angiography and non-gated acquisition for the abdomen on a 256-dectector-row CT. Images were reconstructed with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR-V) and DLIR. Intravascular image noise, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were quantified for the ascending aorta, the descending thoracic aorta, the abdominal aorta and the iliac arteries. Two readers scored subjective image quality on a five-point scale. Compared to ASIR-V, DLIR reduced the median image noise by 51-54% for the ascending aorta and the descending thoracic aorta. Correspondingly, median CNR roughly doubled for the ascending aorta and descending thoracic aorta. There was a 38% reduction in image noise for the abdominal aorta and the iliac arteries, with a corresponding improvement in CNR. Median subjective image quality improved from good to excellent at all anatomical levels. In CT angiography of the aorta, DLIR substantially improved objective and subjective image quality beyond what can be achieved by state-of-the-art iterative reconstruction. This can pave the way for further radiation or contrast dose reductions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available