Deep-learning denoising minimizes radiation exposure in neck CT beyond the limits of conventional reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Neck computed tomography (NCT) is essential for diagnosing suspected neck tumors and abscesses, but radiation exposure can be an issue. In conventional reconstruction techniques, limiting radiation dose comes at the cost of diminished diagnostic accuracy. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effects of an AI-based denoising post-processing software solution in low-dose neck computer tomography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 01 September 2023 to 01 December 2023, we retrospectively included patients with clinically suspected neck tumors from the same single-source scanner. The scans were reconstructed using Advanced Modeled Iterative Reconstruction (Original) at 100% and simulated 50% and 25% radiation doses. Each dataset was post-processed using a novel denoising software solution (Denoising). Three radiologists with varying experience levels subjectively rated image quality, diagnostic confidence, sharpness, and contrast for all pairwise combinations of radiation dose and reconstruction mode in a randomized, blinded forced-choice setup. Objective image quality was assessed using ROI measurements of mean CT numbers, noise, and a contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). An adequately corrected mixed-effects analysis was used to compare objective and subjective image quality. RESULTS: At each radiation dose level, pairwise comparisons showed significantly lower image noise and higher CNR for Denoising than for Original (p < 0.001). In subjective analysis, image quality, diagnostic confidence, sharpness, and contrast were significantly higher for Denoising than for Original at 100 and 50 % (p < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the subjective ratings between Original 100 % and Denoising 25 % (p = 0.906). CONCLUSIONS: The investigated denoising algorithm enables diagnostic-quality neck CT images with radiation doses reduced to 25% of conventional levels, significantly minimizing patient exposure.

Quantitative Flow Measurements of Pelvic Venous Vasculature Using 4D Flow MRI.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 4D Flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences for quantitative flow measurements of the pelvic venous vasculature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study of healthy volunteers was performed. After informed consent all subjects underwent 4D flow sequences at a 3 T MRI scanner with different isotropic resolution and different velocity encoding (Venc) settings: (sequence #1) voxel size (VS) 1.63 mm3, Venc 50 cm/s; (sequence #2) VS 1.63 mm3, Venc 100 cm/s and (sequence #3) VS 2.03 mm3, Venc 50 cm/s. Perfusion parameters were calculated for all venous vessel segments starting at the level of the inferior vena cava and extending caudally to the level of the common femoral vein. For reference, arterial flow was calculated using 1.63 mm3 isotropic resolution with a Venc of 100 cm/s. RESULTS: Ten healthy subjects (median age 28 years, interquartile range [IQR]: 26.25-28 years) were enrolled in this study. Median scanning time was 12:12 minutes (IQR 10:22-13:32 minutes) for sequence #1, 11:02 minutes (IQR 9:57-11:19 minutes) for sequence #2 and 6:10 minutes (IQR 5:44-6:47 minutes) for sequence #3. Flow measurements were derived from all sequences. The venous pelvic vasculature showed similar perfusion parameters compared to its arterial counterpart, for example the right common iliac arterial segment showed a perfusion of 8.32 ml/s (IQR: 6.94-10.68 ml/s) versus 7.29 ml/s (IQR: 4.70-8.90 ml/s) in the corresponding venous segment (P = 0.218). The venous flow measurements obtained from the three investigated sequences did not reveal significant differences. CONCLUSION: 4D Flow MRI is suitable for quantitative flow measurement of the venous pelvic vasculature. To reduce the scanning time without compromising quantitative results, the resolution can be decreased while increasing the Venc. This technique may be utilized in the future for the diagnosis and treatment response assessment of iliac vein compression syndromes.

How Real Are Computed Tomography Low Dose Simulations? An Investigational In-Vivo Large Animal Study.

OBJECTIVES: CT low-dose simulation methods have gained significant traction in protocol development, as they lack the risk of increased patient exposure. However, in-vivo validations of low-dose simulations are as uncommon as prospective low-dose image acquisition itself. Therefore, we investigated the extent to which simulated low-dose CT datasets resemble their real-dose counterparts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen veterinarian-sedated alive pigs underwent three CT scans on the same third generation dual-source scanner with 2 months between each scan. At each time, three additional scans ensued, with mAs reduced to 50%, 25%, and 10%. All scans were reconstructed using wFBP and ADMIRE levels 1-5. Matching low-dose datasets were generated from the 100% scans using reconstruction-based and DICOM-based simulations. Objective image quality (CT numbers stability, noise, and signal-to-noise ratio) was measured via consistent regions of interest. Three radiologists independently rated all possible dataset combinations per time point for subjective image quality (-1=inferior, 0=equal, 1=superior). The points were averaged for a semiquantitative score, and inter-rater-agreement was measured using Spearman's correlation coefficient. A structural similarity index (SSIM) analyzed the voxel-wise similarity of the volumes. Adequately corrected mixed-effects analysis compared objective and subjective image quality. Multiple linear regression with three-way interactions measured the contribution of dose, reconstruction mode, simulation method, and rater to subjective image quality. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between objective and subjective image quality of reconstruction-based and DICOM-based simulation on all dose levels (p≥0.137). However, both simulation methods produced significantly lower objective image quality than real-dose images below 25% mAs due to noise overestimation (p<0.001; SSIM≤89±3). Overall, inter-rater-agreement was strong (r≥0.68, mean 0.93±0.05, 95% CI 0.92-0.94; each p<0.001). In regression analysis, significant decreases in subjective image quality were observed for lower radiation doses (b ≤ -0.387, 95%CI -0.399 to -0.358; p<0.001) but not for reconstruction modes, simulation methods, raters, or three-way interactions (p≥0.103). CONCLUSION: Simulated low-dose CT datasets are subjectively and objectively indistinguishable from their real-dose counterparts down to 25% mAs, making them an invaluable tool for efficient low-dose protocol development.

AI Denoising Improves Image Quality and Radiological Workflows in Pediatric Ultra-Low-Dose Thorax Computed Tomography Scans.

(1) This study evaluates the impact of an AI denoising algorithm on image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and radiological workflows in pediatric chest ultra-low-dose CT (ULDCT). (2) Methods: 100 consecutive pediatric thorax ULDCT were included and reconstructed using weighted filtered back projection (wFBP), iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE 2), and AI denoising (PixelShine). Place-consistent noise measurements were used to compare objective image quality. Eight blinded readers independently rated the subjective image quality on a Likert scale (1 = worst to 5 = best). Each reader wrote a semiquantitative report to evaluate disease severity using a severity score with six common pathologies. The time to diagnosis was measured for each reader to compare the possible workflow benefits. Properly corrected mixed-effects analysis with post-hoc subgroup tests were used. Spearman's correlation coefficient measured inter-reader agreement for the subjective image quality analysis and the severity score sheets. (3) Results: The highest noise was measured for wFBP, followed by ADMIRE 2, and PixelShine (76.9 ± 9.62 vs. 43.4 ± 4.45 vs. 34.8 ± 3.27 HU; each p < 0.001). The highest subjective image quality was measured for PixelShine, followed by ADMIRE 2, and wFBP (4 (4−5) vs. 3 (4−5) vs. 3 (2−4), each p < 0.001) with good inter-rater agreement (r ≥ 0.790; p ≤ 0.001). In diagnostic accuracy analysis, there was a good inter-rater agreement between the severity scores (r ≥ 0.764; p < 0.001) without significant differences between severity score items per reconstruction mode (F (5.71; 566) = 0.792; p = 0.570). The shortest time to diagnosis was measured for the PixelShine datasets, followed by ADMIRE 2, and wFBP (2.28 ± 1.56 vs. 2.45 ± 1.90 vs. 2.66 ± 2.31 min; F (1.000; 99.00) = 268.1; p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: AI denoising significantly improves image quality in pediatric thorax ULDCT without compromising the diagnostic confidence and reduces the time to diagnosis substantially.

AI Denoising Significantly Enhances Image Quality and Diagnostic Confidence in Interventional Cone-Beam Computed Tomography.

(1) To investigate whether interventional cone-beam computed tomography (cbCT) could benefit from AI denoising, particularly with respect to patient body mass index (BMI); (2) From 1 January 2016 to 1 January 2022, 100 patients with liver-directed interventions and peri-procedural cbCT were included. The unenhanced mask run and the contrast-enhanced fill run of the cbCT were reconstructed using weighted filtered back projection. Additionally, each dataset was post-processed using a novel denoising software solution. Place-consistent regions of interest measured signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) per dataset. Corrected mixed-effects analysis with BMI subgroup analyses compared objective image quality. Multiple linear regression measured the contribution of "Radiation Dose", "Body-Mass-Index", and "Mode" to SNR. Two radiologists independently rated diagnostic confidence. Inter-rater agreement was measured using Spearman correlation (r); (3) SNR was significantly higher in the denoised datasets than in the regular datasets (p < 0.001). Furthermore, BMI subgroup analysis showed significant SNR deteriorations in the regular datasets for higher patient BMI (p < 0.001), but stable results for denoising (p > 0.999). In regression, only denoising contributed positively towards SNR (0.6191; 95%CI 0.6096 to 0.6286; p < 0.001). The denoised datasets received overall significantly higher diagnostic confidence grades (p = 0.010), with good inter-rater agreement (r ≥ 0.795, p < 0.001). In a subgroup analysis, diagnostic confidence deteriorated significantly for higher patient BMI (p < 0.001) in the regular datasets but was stable in the denoised datasets (p ≥ 0.103).; (4) AI denoising can significantly enhance image quality in interventional cone-beam CT and effectively mitigate diagnostic confidence deterioration for rising patient BMI.

AI Denoising Significantly Improves Image Quality in Whole-Body Low-Dose Computed Tomography Staging.

(1) Background: To evaluate the effects of an AI-based denoising post-processing software solution in low-dose whole-body computer tomography (WBCT) stagings; (2) Methods: From 1 January 2019 to 1 January 2021, we retrospectively included biometrically matching melanoma patients with clinically indicated WBCT staging from two scanners. The scans were reconstructed using weighted filtered back-projection (wFBP) and Advanced Modeled Iterative Reconstruction strength 2 (ADMIRE 2) at 100% and simulated 50%, 40%, and 30% radiation doses. Each dataset was post-processed using a novel denoising software solution. Five blinded radiologists independently scored subjective image quality twice with 6 weeks between readings. Inter-rater agreement and intra-rater reliability were determined with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). An adequately corrected mixed-effects analysis was used to compare objective and subjective image quality. Multiple linear regression measured the contribution of "Radiation Dose", "Scanner", "Mode", "Rater", and "Timepoint" to image quality. Consistent regions of interest (ROI) measured noise for objective image quality; (3) Results: With good-excellent inter-rater agreement and intra-rater reliability (Timepoint 1: ICC ≥ 0.82, 95% CI 0.74-0.88; Timepoint 2: ICC ≥ 0.86, 95% CI 0.80-0.91; Timepoint 1 vs. 2: ICC ≥ 0.84, 95% CI 0.78-0.90; all p ≤ 0.001), subjective image quality deteriorated significantly below 100% for wFBP and ADMIRE 2 but remained good-excellent for the post-processed images, regardless of input (p ≤ 0.002). In regression analysis, significant increases in subjective image quality were only observed for higher radiation doses (≥0.78, 95%CI 0.63-0.93; p < 0.001), as well as for the post-processed images (≥2.88, 95%CI 2.72-3.03, p < 0.001). All post-processed images had significantly lower image noise than their standard counterparts (p < 0.001), with no differences between the post-processed images themselves. (4) Conclusions: The investigated AI post-processing software solution produces diagnostic images as low as 30% of the initial radiation dose (3.13 ± 0.75 mSv), regardless of scanner type or reconstruction method. Therefore, it might help limit patient radiation exposure, especially in the setting of repeated whole-body staging examinations.