Combination of Deep Learning-Based Denoising and Iterative Reconstruction for Ultra-Low-Dose CT of the Chest: Image Quality and Lung-RADS Evaluation.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to assess the effect of the combination of deep learning-based denoising (DLD) and iterative reconstruction (IR) on image quality and Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) evaluation on chest ultra-low-dose CT (ULDCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS. Forty-one patients with 252 nodules were evaluated retrospectively. All patients underwent ULDCT (mean ± SD, 0.19 ± 0.01 mSv) and standard-dose CT (SDCT) (6.46 ± 2.28 mSv). ULDCT images were reconstructed using hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), and they were postprocessed using DLD (i.e., HIR-DLD and MBIR-DLD). SDCT images were reconstructed using filtered back projection. Three independent radiologists subjectively evaluated HIR, HIR-DLD, MBIR, and MBIR-DLD images on a 5-point scale in terms of noise, streak artifact, nodule edge, clarity of small vessels, homogeneity of the normal lung parenchyma, and overall image quality. Two radiologists independently evaluated the nodules according to Lung-RADS using HIR, MBIR, HIR-DLD, and MBIR-DLD ULDCT images and SDCT images. The median scores for subjective analysis were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed rank test with Bonferroni correction. Intraobserver agreement for Lung-RADS category between ULDCT and SDCT was evaluated using the weighted kappa coefficient. RESULTS. In the subjective analysis, ULDCT with DLD showed significantly better scores than did ULDCT without DLD (p < 0.001), and MBIR-DLD showed the best scores among the ULDCT images (p < 0.001) for all items. In the Lung-RADS evaluation, HIR showed fair or moderate agreement (reader 1 and reader 2 κw = 0.46 and 0.32, respectively); MBIR, moderate or good agreement (κw = 0.68 and 0.57); HIR-DLD, moderate agreement (κw = 0.53 and 0.48); and MBIR-DLD, good agreement (κw = 0.70 and 0.72). CONCLUSION. DLD improved the image quality of both HIR and MBIR on ULDCT. MBIR-DLD was superior to HIR_DLD for image quality and for Lung-RADS evaluation.