High-resolution deep learning reconstruction for coronary CTA: compared efficacy of stenosis evaluation with other methods at in vitro and in vivo studies.
IF 4.7 2区 医学Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
{"title":"High-resolution deep learning reconstruction for coronary CTA: compared efficacy of stenosis evaluation with other methods at in vitro and in vivo studies.","authors":"Takahiro Matsuyama, Hiroyuki Nagata, Yoshiyuki Ozawa, Yuya Ito, Hirona Kimata, Kenji Fujii, Naruomi Akino, Takahiro Ueda, Masahiko Nomura, Takeshi Yoshikawa, Daisuke Takenaka, Hideki Kawai, Masayoshi Sarai, Hideo Izawa, Yoshiharu Ohno","doi":"10.1007/s00330-025-11376-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To directly compare coronary arterial stenosis evaluations by hybrid-type iterative reconstruction (IR), model-based IR (MBIR), deep learning reconstruction (DLR), and high-resolution deep learning reconstruction (HR-DLR) on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) in both in vitro and in vivo studies.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>For the in vitro study, a total of three-vessel tube phantoms with diameters of 3 mm, 4 mm, and 5 mm and with simulated non-calcified stepped stenosis plaques with degrees of 0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% stenosis were scanned with area-detector CT (ADCT) and ultra-high-resolution CT (UHR-CT). Then, ADCT data were reconstructed using all methods, although UHR-CT data were reconstructed with hybrid-type IR, MBIR, and DLR. For the in vivo study, patients who had undergone CCTA at ADCT were retrospectively selected, and each CCTA data set was reconstructed with all methods. To compare the image noise and measurement accuracy at each of the stenosis levels, image noise, and inner diameter were evaluated and statistically compared. To determine the effect of HR-DLR on CAD-RADS evaluation accuracy, the accuracy of CAD-RADS categorization of all CCTAs was compared by using McNemar's test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The image noise of HR-DLR was significantly lower than that of others on ADCT and UHR-CT (p < 0.0001). At a 50% and 75% stenosis level for each phantom, hybrid-type IR showed a significantly larger mean difference on ADCT than did others (p < 0.05). At in vivo study, 31 patients were included. Accuracy on HR-DLR was significantly higher than that on hybrid-type IR, MBIR, or DLR (p < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>HR-DLR is potentially superior for coronary arterial stenosis evaluations to hybrid-type IR, MBIR, or DLR shown on CCTA.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question How do coronary arterial stenosis evaluations by hybrid-type IR, MBIR, DLR, and HR-DLR compare to coronary CT angiography? Findings HR-DLR showed significantly lower image noise and more accurate coronary artery disease reporting and data system (CAD-RADS) evaluation than others. Clinical relevance HR-DLR is potentially superior to other reconstruction methods for coronary arterial stenosis evaluations, as demonstrated by coronary CT angiography results on ADCT and as shown in both in vitro and in vivo studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11376-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To directly compare coronary arterial stenosis evaluations by hybrid-type iterative reconstruction (IR), model-based IR (MBIR), deep learning reconstruction (DLR), and high-resolution deep learning reconstruction (HR-DLR) on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) in both in vitro and in vivo studies.
Materials and methods: For the in vitro study, a total of three-vessel tube phantoms with diameters of 3 mm, 4 mm, and 5 mm and with simulated non-calcified stepped stenosis plaques with degrees of 0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% stenosis were scanned with area-detector CT (ADCT) and ultra-high-resolution CT (UHR-CT). Then, ADCT data were reconstructed using all methods, although UHR-CT data were reconstructed with hybrid-type IR, MBIR, and DLR. For the in vivo study, patients who had undergone CCTA at ADCT were retrospectively selected, and each CCTA data set was reconstructed with all methods. To compare the image noise and measurement accuracy at each of the stenosis levels, image noise, and inner diameter were evaluated and statistically compared. To determine the effect of HR-DLR on CAD-RADS evaluation accuracy, the accuracy of CAD-RADS categorization of all CCTAs was compared by using McNemar's test.
Results: The image noise of HR-DLR was significantly lower than that of others on ADCT and UHR-CT (p < 0.0001). At a 50% and 75% stenosis level for each phantom, hybrid-type IR showed a significantly larger mean difference on ADCT than did others (p < 0.05). At in vivo study, 31 patients were included. Accuracy on HR-DLR was significantly higher than that on hybrid-type IR, MBIR, or DLR (p < 0.0001).
Conclusion: HR-DLR is potentially superior for coronary arterial stenosis evaluations to hybrid-type IR, MBIR, or DLR shown on CCTA.
Key points: Question How do coronary arterial stenosis evaluations by hybrid-type IR, MBIR, DLR, and HR-DLR compare to coronary CT angiography? Findings HR-DLR showed significantly lower image noise and more accurate coronary artery disease reporting and data system (CAD-RADS) evaluation than others. Clinical relevance HR-DLR is potentially superior to other reconstruction methods for coronary arterial stenosis evaluations, as demonstrated by coronary CT angiography results on ADCT and as shown in both in vitro and in vivo studies.
期刊介绍:
European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field.
This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies.
From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.