基于深度学习重建的超低辐射剂量CT肺动脉造影中肺栓塞检测的图像质量改进和人工智能性能。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Jinjuan Lu, Leilei Shen, Chun Zhou, Zhenghong Bi, Xiaodan Ye, Zicheng Zhao, Mengsu Zeng, Mingliang Wang
{"title":"基于深度学习重建的超低辐射剂量CT肺动脉造影中肺栓塞检测的图像质量改进和人工智能性能。","authors":"Jinjuan Lu, Leilei Shen, Chun Zhou, Zhenghong Bi, Xiaodan Ye, Zicheng Zhao, Mengsu Zeng, Mingliang Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.acra.2025.09.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale and objectives: </strong>To evaluate the image quality of deep learning reconstruction (DLR)-based ultra-low dose (ULD) CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) images and determine whether the artificial intelligence (AI) software can improve the diagnostic performance of radiologist for detecting pulmonary embolism (PE) with ULD images.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This prospective two-center study enrolled 144 patients with suspected PE who underwent CTPA from July to October 2024. Patients were randomized into two groups equally. Images in the routine-dose (RD) group were reconstructed using hybrid-iterative reconstruction (HIR), while ULD images were reconstructed using HIR and DLR. A subset of 56 participants (1:1 PE to non-PE ratio) in ULD group was randomly selected and evaluated by three radiologists with and without AI software. Reference standard was established by expert consensus. Interrater reliability was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The diagnostic results and interpretation times were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences in demographics between the two groups. ULD-DLR images exhibited significantly higher objective and subjective image quality compared to both RD-HIR and ULD-HIR images. Interobserver agreement was moderate for RD-HIR (ICC=0.77) and excellent for ULD-DLR images (ICC=0.84). For radiologist detection of PE assisted by AI, both ULD-HIR and ULD-DLR cohorts exhibited near-perfect accuracy, outperforming unassisted readings (sensitivity 79.8% vs. 91.7% and specificity 95.5% vs. 99.2% in ULD-HIR; sensitivity 90.5% vs. 96.4% and specificity 95.8% vs. 100.0% in ULD-DLR). AI assistance reduced interpretation time by 19.7% for ULD-HIR and 15.6% for ULD-DLR scans. The effective dose of ULD group was decreased by 74% compared to RD group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DLR can maintain the CTPA image quality even at ultra-low dose level, further ensuring the accuracy and efficiency of AI-assisted PE diagnosis while improving radiation safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":50928,"journal":{"name":"Academic Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Image Quality Improvement and Artificial Intelligence Performance in Pulmonary Embolism Detection at Deep Learning Reconstruction-Based Ultra-low Radiation Dose CT Pulmonary Angiography.\",\"authors\":\"Jinjuan Lu, Leilei Shen, Chun Zhou, Zhenghong Bi, Xiaodan Ye, Zicheng Zhao, Mengsu Zeng, Mingliang Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acra.2025.09.018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Rationale and objectives: </strong>To evaluate the image quality of deep learning reconstruction (DLR)-based ultra-low dose (ULD) CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) images and determine whether the artificial intelligence (AI) software can improve the diagnostic performance of radiologist for detecting pulmonary embolism (PE) with ULD images.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This prospective two-center study enrolled 144 patients with suspected PE who underwent CTPA from July to October 2024. Patients were randomized into two groups equally. Images in the routine-dose (RD) group were reconstructed using hybrid-iterative reconstruction (HIR), while ULD images were reconstructed using HIR and DLR. A subset of 56 participants (1:1 PE to non-PE ratio) in ULD group was randomly selected and evaluated by three radiologists with and without AI software. Reference standard was established by expert consensus. Interrater reliability was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The diagnostic results and interpretation times were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences in demographics between the two groups. ULD-DLR images exhibited significantly higher objective and subjective image quality compared to both RD-HIR and ULD-HIR images. Interobserver agreement was moderate for RD-HIR (ICC=0.77) and excellent for ULD-DLR images (ICC=0.84). For radiologist detection of PE assisted by AI, both ULD-HIR and ULD-DLR cohorts exhibited near-perfect accuracy, outperforming unassisted readings (sensitivity 79.8% vs. 91.7% and specificity 95.5% vs. 99.2% in ULD-HIR; sensitivity 90.5% vs. 96.4% and specificity 95.8% vs. 100.0% in ULD-DLR). AI assistance reduced interpretation time by 19.7% for ULD-HIR and 15.6% for ULD-DLR scans. The effective dose of ULD group was decreased by 74% compared to RD group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DLR can maintain the CTPA image quality even at ultra-low dose level, further ensuring the accuracy and efficiency of AI-assisted PE diagnosis while improving radiation safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2025.09.018\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2025.09.018","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

摘要

目的:评估基于深度学习重建(DLR)的超低剂量(ULD) CT肺血管造影(CTPA)图像的图像质量,并确定人工智能(AI)软件是否可以提高放射科医生使用ULD图像检测肺栓塞(PE)的诊断性能。材料和方法:这项前瞻性双中心研究纳入了144例疑似PE患者,他们于2024年7月至10月接受了CTPA。患者被随机分为两组。常规剂量组(RD)图像采用混合迭代重建(HIR)重建,ULD图像采用HIR和DLR重建。ULD组的56名参与者(1:1的PE与非PE比例)被随机选择,并由三名有或没有人工智能软件的放射科医生进行评估。通过专家共识建立标准品。组间信度由组内相关系数(ICC)确定。记录诊断结果和判读次数。结果:两组患者人口统计学差异无统计学意义。与RD-HIR和ld - hir图像相比,ld - dlr图像表现出更高的客观和主观图像质量。观察者间一致性在RD-HIR图像中为中等(ICC=0.77),在ld - dlr图像中为极好(ICC=0.84)。对于人工智能辅助下的放射科医师PE检测,ld - hir和ld - dlr队列均表现出近乎完美的准确性,优于无辅助读数(在ld - hir中,灵敏度79.8%对91.7%,特异性95.5%对99.2%;在ld - dlr中,灵敏度90.5%对96.4%,特异性95.8%对100.0%)。人工智能辅助将ld - hir和ld - dlr扫描的解释时间分别减少了19.7%和15.6%。与RD组相比,ULD组有效剂量降低74%。结论:DLR在超低剂量水平下仍能保持CTPA图像质量,进一步保证了ai辅助PE诊断的准确性和效率,同时提高了辐射安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Image Quality Improvement and Artificial Intelligence Performance in Pulmonary Embolism Detection at Deep Learning Reconstruction-Based Ultra-low Radiation Dose CT Pulmonary Angiography.

Rationale and objectives: To evaluate the image quality of deep learning reconstruction (DLR)-based ultra-low dose (ULD) CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) images and determine whether the artificial intelligence (AI) software can improve the diagnostic performance of radiologist for detecting pulmonary embolism (PE) with ULD images.

Materials and methods: This prospective two-center study enrolled 144 patients with suspected PE who underwent CTPA from July to October 2024. Patients were randomized into two groups equally. Images in the routine-dose (RD) group were reconstructed using hybrid-iterative reconstruction (HIR), while ULD images were reconstructed using HIR and DLR. A subset of 56 participants (1:1 PE to non-PE ratio) in ULD group was randomly selected and evaluated by three radiologists with and without AI software. Reference standard was established by expert consensus. Interrater reliability was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The diagnostic results and interpretation times were recorded.

Results: There were no significant differences in demographics between the two groups. ULD-DLR images exhibited significantly higher objective and subjective image quality compared to both RD-HIR and ULD-HIR images. Interobserver agreement was moderate for RD-HIR (ICC=0.77) and excellent for ULD-DLR images (ICC=0.84). For radiologist detection of PE assisted by AI, both ULD-HIR and ULD-DLR cohorts exhibited near-perfect accuracy, outperforming unassisted readings (sensitivity 79.8% vs. 91.7% and specificity 95.5% vs. 99.2% in ULD-HIR; sensitivity 90.5% vs. 96.4% and specificity 95.8% vs. 100.0% in ULD-DLR). AI assistance reduced interpretation time by 19.7% for ULD-HIR and 15.6% for ULD-DLR scans. The effective dose of ULD group was decreased by 74% compared to RD group.

Conclusion: DLR can maintain the CTPA image quality even at ultra-low dose level, further ensuring the accuracy and efficiency of AI-assisted PE diagnosis while improving radiation safety.

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
Academic Radiology
Academic Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
10.40%
发文量
432
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: Academic Radiology publishes original reports of clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, image-guided interventions and related techniques. It also includes brief technical reports describing original observations, techniques, and instrumental developments; state-of-the-art reports on clinical issues, new technology and other topics of current medical importance; meta-analyses; scientific studies and opinions on radiologic education; and letters to the Editor.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信