{"title":"利用第二代深度学习重构技术改进心肌合成心动图的定量。","authors":"Tsubasa Morioka, Shingo Kato, Ayano Onoma, Toshiharu Izumi, Tomokazu Sakano, Eiji Ishikawa, Shungo Sawamura, Naofumi Yasuda, Hiroaki Nagase, Daisuke Utsunomiya","doi":"10.3390/jcdd11100304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The utility of synthetic ECV, which does not require hematocrit values, has been reported; however, high-quality CT images are essential for accurate quantification. Second-generation Deep Learning Reconstruction (DLR) enables low-noise and high-resolution cardiac CT images. The aim of this study is to compare the differences among four reconstruction methods (hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR), model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), DLR, and second-generation DLR) in the quantification of synthetic ECV.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed 80 patients who underwent cardiac CT scans, including late contrast-enhanced CT (derivation cohort: <i>n</i> = 40, age 71 ± 12 years, 24 males; validation cohort: <i>n</i> = 40, age 67 ± 11 years, 25 males). In the derivation cohort, a linear regression analysis was performed between the hematocrit values from blood tests and the CT values of the right atrial blood pool on non-contrast CT. In the validation cohort, synthetic hematocrit values were calculated using the linear regression equation and the right atrial CT values from non-contrast CT. The correlation and mean difference between synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV calculated from actual blood tests were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV showed a high correlation across all four reconstruction methods (R ≥ 0.95, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The bias and limit of agreement (LOA) in the Bland-Altman plot were lowest with the second-generation DLR (hybrid IR: bias = -0.21, LOA: 3.16; MBIR: bias = -0.79, LOA: 2.81; DLR: bias = -1.87, LOA: 2.90; second-generation DLR: bias = -0.20, LOA: 2.35).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Synthetic ECV using second-generation DLR demonstrated the lowest bias and LOA compared to laboratory ECV among the four reconstruction methods, suggesting that second-generation DLR enables more accurate quantification.</p>","PeriodicalId":15197,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease","volume":"11 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11514731/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improvement of Quantification of Myocardial Synthetic ECV with Second-Generation Deep Learning Reconstruction.\",\"authors\":\"Tsubasa Morioka, Shingo Kato, Ayano Onoma, Toshiharu Izumi, Tomokazu Sakano, Eiji Ishikawa, Shungo Sawamura, Naofumi Yasuda, Hiroaki Nagase, Daisuke Utsunomiya\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/jcdd11100304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The utility of synthetic ECV, which does not require hematocrit values, has been reported; however, high-quality CT images are essential for accurate quantification. Second-generation Deep Learning Reconstruction (DLR) enables low-noise and high-resolution cardiac CT images. The aim of this study is to compare the differences among four reconstruction methods (hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR), model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), DLR, and second-generation DLR) in the quantification of synthetic ECV.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed 80 patients who underwent cardiac CT scans, including late contrast-enhanced CT (derivation cohort: <i>n</i> = 40, age 71 ± 12 years, 24 males; validation cohort: <i>n</i> = 40, age 67 ± 11 years, 25 males). In the derivation cohort, a linear regression analysis was performed between the hematocrit values from blood tests and the CT values of the right atrial blood pool on non-contrast CT. In the validation cohort, synthetic hematocrit values were calculated using the linear regression equation and the right atrial CT values from non-contrast CT. The correlation and mean difference between synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV calculated from actual blood tests were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV showed a high correlation across all four reconstruction methods (R ≥ 0.95, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The bias and limit of agreement (LOA) in the Bland-Altman plot were lowest with the second-generation DLR (hybrid IR: bias = -0.21, LOA: 3.16; MBIR: bias = -0.79, LOA: 2.81; DLR: bias = -1.87, LOA: 2.90; second-generation DLR: bias = -0.20, LOA: 2.35).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Synthetic ECV using second-generation DLR demonstrated the lowest bias and LOA compared to laboratory ECV among the four reconstruction methods, suggesting that second-generation DLR enables more accurate quantification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease\",\"volume\":\"11 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11514731/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd11100304\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd11100304","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Improvement of Quantification of Myocardial Synthetic ECV with Second-Generation Deep Learning Reconstruction.
Background: The utility of synthetic ECV, which does not require hematocrit values, has been reported; however, high-quality CT images are essential for accurate quantification. Second-generation Deep Learning Reconstruction (DLR) enables low-noise and high-resolution cardiac CT images. The aim of this study is to compare the differences among four reconstruction methods (hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR), model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), DLR, and second-generation DLR) in the quantification of synthetic ECV.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 80 patients who underwent cardiac CT scans, including late contrast-enhanced CT (derivation cohort: n = 40, age 71 ± 12 years, 24 males; validation cohort: n = 40, age 67 ± 11 years, 25 males). In the derivation cohort, a linear regression analysis was performed between the hematocrit values from blood tests and the CT values of the right atrial blood pool on non-contrast CT. In the validation cohort, synthetic hematocrit values were calculated using the linear regression equation and the right atrial CT values from non-contrast CT. The correlation and mean difference between synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV calculated from actual blood tests were assessed.
Results: Synthetic ECV and laboratory ECV showed a high correlation across all four reconstruction methods (R ≥ 0.95, p < 0.001). The bias and limit of agreement (LOA) in the Bland-Altman plot were lowest with the second-generation DLR (hybrid IR: bias = -0.21, LOA: 3.16; MBIR: bias = -0.79, LOA: 2.81; DLR: bias = -1.87, LOA: 2.90; second-generation DLR: bias = -0.20, LOA: 2.35).
Conclusions: Synthetic ECV using second-generation DLR demonstrated the lowest bias and LOA compared to laboratory ECV among the four reconstruction methods, suggesting that second-generation DLR enables more accurate quantification.