利用深度渐进式学习重建算法增强不同体重指数的18F-FDG PET图像质量和病变诊断性能。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Zhihao Chen, Hongxing Yang, Ming Qi, Wen Chen, Fei Liu, Shaoli Song, Jianping Zhang
{"title":"利用深度渐进式学习重建算法增强不同体重指数的18F-FDG PET图像质量和病变诊断性能。","authors":"Zhihao Chen, Hongxing Yang, Ming Qi, Wen Chen, Fei Liu, Shaoli Song, Jianping Zhang","doi":"10.1186/s40644-025-00877-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As body mass index (BMI) increases, the quality of 2-deoxy-2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-D-glucose (<sup>18</sup>F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) images reconstructed with ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) declines, negatively impacting lesion diagnostics. It is crucial to identify methods that ensure consistent diagnostic accuracy and maintain image quality. Deep progressive learning (DPL) algorithm, an Artificial Intelligence(AI)-based PET reconstruction technique, offers a promising solution.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>150 patients underwent <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT scans and were categorized by BMI into underweight, normal, and overweight groups. PET images were reconstructed using both OSEM and DPL and their image quality was assessed both visually and quantitatively. Visual assessment employed a 5-point Likert scale to evaluate overall score, image sharpness, image noise, and diagnostic confidence. Quantitative assessment parameters included the background liver image-uniformity-index ([Formula: see text]) and signal-to-noise ratio ([Formula: see text]). Additionally, 466 identifiable lesions were categorized by size: sub-centimeter and larger. We compared maximum standard uptake value ([Formula: see text]), signal-to-background ratio ([Formula: see text]), [Formula: see text], contrast-to-background ratio ([Formula: see text]), and contrast-to-noise ratio ([Formula: see text]) of these lesions to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the DPL and OSEM algorithms across different lesion sizes and BMI categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DPL produced superior PET image quality compared to OSEM across all BMI groups. The visual quality of DPL showed a slight decline with increasing BMI, while OSEM exhibited a more significant decline. DPL maintained a stable [Formula: see text] across BMI increases, whereas OSEM exhibited increased noise. In the DPL group, quantitative image quality for overweight patients matched that of normal patients with minimal variance from underweight patients. In contrast, OSEM demonstrated significant declines in quantitative image quality with rising BMI. DPL yielded significantly higher contrast ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text],[Formula: see text]) and [Formula: see text] than OSEM for all lesions across all BMI categories.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DPL consistently provided superior image quality and lesion diagnostic performance compared to OSEM across all BMI categories in <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT scans. Therefore, we recommend using the DPL algorithm for <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT image reconstruction in all BMI patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":9548,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Imaging","volume":"25 1","pages":"58"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12044768/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhancing <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET image quality and lesion diagnostic performance across different body mass index using the deep progressive learning reconstruction algorithm.\",\"authors\":\"Zhihao Chen, Hongxing Yang, Ming Qi, Wen Chen, Fei Liu, Shaoli Song, Jianping Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40644-025-00877-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As body mass index (BMI) increases, the quality of 2-deoxy-2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-D-glucose (<sup>18</sup>F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) images reconstructed with ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) declines, negatively impacting lesion diagnostics. It is crucial to identify methods that ensure consistent diagnostic accuracy and maintain image quality. Deep progressive learning (DPL) algorithm, an Artificial Intelligence(AI)-based PET reconstruction technique, offers a promising solution.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>150 patients underwent <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT scans and were categorized by BMI into underweight, normal, and overweight groups. PET images were reconstructed using both OSEM and DPL and their image quality was assessed both visually and quantitatively. Visual assessment employed a 5-point Likert scale to evaluate overall score, image sharpness, image noise, and diagnostic confidence. Quantitative assessment parameters included the background liver image-uniformity-index ([Formula: see text]) and signal-to-noise ratio ([Formula: see text]). Additionally, 466 identifiable lesions were categorized by size: sub-centimeter and larger. We compared maximum standard uptake value ([Formula: see text]), signal-to-background ratio ([Formula: see text]), [Formula: see text], contrast-to-background ratio ([Formula: see text]), and contrast-to-noise ratio ([Formula: see text]) of these lesions to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the DPL and OSEM algorithms across different lesion sizes and BMI categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DPL produced superior PET image quality compared to OSEM across all BMI groups. The visual quality of DPL showed a slight decline with increasing BMI, while OSEM exhibited a more significant decline. DPL maintained a stable [Formula: see text] across BMI increases, whereas OSEM exhibited increased noise. In the DPL group, quantitative image quality for overweight patients matched that of normal patients with minimal variance from underweight patients. In contrast, OSEM demonstrated significant declines in quantitative image quality with rising BMI. DPL yielded significantly higher contrast ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text],[Formula: see text]) and [Formula: see text] than OSEM for all lesions across all BMI categories.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DPL consistently provided superior image quality and lesion diagnostic performance compared to OSEM across all BMI categories in <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT scans. Therefore, we recommend using the DPL algorithm for <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT image reconstruction in all BMI patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9548,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Imaging\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"58\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12044768/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-025-00877-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-025-00877-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随着身体质量指数(BMI)的增加,用有序亚群期望最大化(OSEM)重建的2-脱氧-2-[氟-18]氟-d -葡萄糖(18F-FDG)正电子发射断层扫描(PET)图像质量下降,对病变诊断产生负面影响。确定确保一致诊断准确性和保持图像质量的方法至关重要。深度渐进学习(DPL)算法是一种基于人工智能(AI)的PET重建技术,提供了一个很有前途的解决方案。方法:150例患者接受18F-FDG PET/CT扫描,按BMI分为体重过轻组、正常组和超重组。用OSEM和DPL重建PET图像,并从视觉和定量上评价其图像质量。视觉评估采用5分李克特量表评估总分、图像清晰度、图像噪声和诊断置信度。定量评价参数包括背景肝脏图像均匀度指数([公式:见文])和信噪比([公式:见文])。此外,466个可识别的病变按大小分类:亚厘米及更大。我们比较了这些病变的最大标准摄取值([公式:见文])、信本比([公式:见文])、[公式:见文]、背景对比比([公式:见文])和噪声对比比([公式:见文]),以评估DPL和OSEM算法在不同病变大小和BMI类别中的诊断性能。结果:与OSEM相比,DPL在所有BMI组中产生了更好的PET图像质量。DPL的视觉质量随BMI的增加而略有下降,而OSEM的下降更为明显。DPL在BMI增加时保持稳定[公式:见文本],而OSEM表现出增加的噪声。在DPL组中,超重患者的定量图像质量与正常患者相匹配,与体重不足患者的差异最小。相比之下,OSEM显示定量图像质量随着BMI的上升而显著下降。DPL在所有BMI类别的所有病变中产生的对比度明显高于OSEM([公式:见文],[公式:见文],[公式:见文])和[公式:见文]。结论:在18F-FDG PET/CT扫描中,与OSEM相比,DPL在所有BMI类别中始终提供更好的图像质量和病变诊断性能。因此,我们建议在所有BMI患者中使用DPL算法进行18F-FDG PET/CT图像重建。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enhancing 18F-FDG PET image quality and lesion diagnostic performance across different body mass index using the deep progressive learning reconstruction algorithm.

Background: As body mass index (BMI) increases, the quality of 2-deoxy-2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-D-glucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) images reconstructed with ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) declines, negatively impacting lesion diagnostics. It is crucial to identify methods that ensure consistent diagnostic accuracy and maintain image quality. Deep progressive learning (DPL) algorithm, an Artificial Intelligence(AI)-based PET reconstruction technique, offers a promising solution.

Methods: 150 patients underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT scans and were categorized by BMI into underweight, normal, and overweight groups. PET images were reconstructed using both OSEM and DPL and their image quality was assessed both visually and quantitatively. Visual assessment employed a 5-point Likert scale to evaluate overall score, image sharpness, image noise, and diagnostic confidence. Quantitative assessment parameters included the background liver image-uniformity-index ([Formula: see text]) and signal-to-noise ratio ([Formula: see text]). Additionally, 466 identifiable lesions were categorized by size: sub-centimeter and larger. We compared maximum standard uptake value ([Formula: see text]), signal-to-background ratio ([Formula: see text]), [Formula: see text], contrast-to-background ratio ([Formula: see text]), and contrast-to-noise ratio ([Formula: see text]) of these lesions to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the DPL and OSEM algorithms across different lesion sizes and BMI categories.

Results: DPL produced superior PET image quality compared to OSEM across all BMI groups. The visual quality of DPL showed a slight decline with increasing BMI, while OSEM exhibited a more significant decline. DPL maintained a stable [Formula: see text] across BMI increases, whereas OSEM exhibited increased noise. In the DPL group, quantitative image quality for overweight patients matched that of normal patients with minimal variance from underweight patients. In contrast, OSEM demonstrated significant declines in quantitative image quality with rising BMI. DPL yielded significantly higher contrast ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text],[Formula: see text]) and [Formula: see text] than OSEM for all lesions across all BMI categories.

Conclusion: DPL consistently provided superior image quality and lesion diagnostic performance compared to OSEM across all BMI categories in 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Therefore, we recommend using the DPL algorithm for 18F-FDG PET/CT image reconstruction in all BMI patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Imaging
Cancer Imaging ONCOLOGY-RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
66
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Imaging is an open access, peer-reviewed journal publishing original articles, reviews and editorials written by expert international radiologists working in oncology. The journal encompasses CT, MR, PET, ultrasound, radionuclide and multimodal imaging in all kinds of malignant tumours, plus new developments, techniques and innovations. Topics of interest include: Breast Imaging Chest Complications of treatment Ear, Nose & Throat Gastrointestinal Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Imaging biomarkers Interventional Lymphoma Measurement of tumour response Molecular functional imaging Musculoskeletal Neuro oncology Nuclear Medicine Paediatric.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信