Japanese journal of radiology · 2025
Advantages of deep learning reconstruction algorithm in ultra-high-resolution CT for the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasm.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sofue Keitaro, Ueno Yoshiko, Yabe Shinji, Ueshima Eisuke, Yamaguchi Takeru, Masuda Atsuhiro, Sakai Arata, Toyama Hirochika, Fukumoto Takumi, Hori Masatoshi, Murakami Takamichi
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the image quality and clinical utility of a deep learning reconstruction (DLR) algorithm in ultra-high-resolution computed tomography (UHR-CT) for the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs).
METHODS: This retrospective study included 45 patients with PCNs between March 2020 and February 2022. Contrast-enhanced UHR-CT images were obtained and reconstructed using DLR and hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR). Image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured. Two radiologists assessed the diagnostic performance of the imaging findings associated with PCNs using a 5-point Likert scale. The diagnostic performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), were calculated. Quantitative and qualitative features were compared between CT with DLR and hybrid IR. Interobserver agreement for qualitative assessments was also analyzed.
RESULTS: DLR significantly reduced image noise and increased CNR compared to hybrid IR for all objects (p < 0.001). Radiologists rated DLR images as superior in overall quality, lesion delineation, and vessel conspicuity (p < 0.001). DLR produced higher AUROC values for diagnostic imaging findings (ductal communication: 0.887‒0.938 vs. 0.816‒0.827 and enhanced mural nodule: 0.843‒0.916 vs. 0.785‒0.801), although DLR did not directly improve sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Interobserver agreement for qualitative assessments was higher in CT with DLR (κ = 0.69‒0.82 vs. 0.57‒0.73).
CONCLUSION: DLR improved image quality and diagnostic performance by effectively reducing image noise and improving lesion conspicuity in the diagnosis of PCNs on UHR-CT. The DLR demonstrated greater diagnostic confidence for the assessment of imaging findings associated with PCNs.
METHODS: This retrospective study included 45 patients with PCNs between March 2020 and February 2022. Contrast-enhanced UHR-CT images were obtained and reconstructed using DLR and hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR). Image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured. Two radiologists assessed the diagnostic performance of the imaging findings associated with PCNs using a 5-point Likert scale. The diagnostic performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), were calculated. Quantitative and qualitative features were compared between CT with DLR and hybrid IR. Interobserver agreement for qualitative assessments was also analyzed.
RESULTS: DLR significantly reduced image noise and increased CNR compared to hybrid IR for all objects (p < 0.001). Radiologists rated DLR images as superior in overall quality, lesion delineation, and vessel conspicuity (p < 0.001). DLR produced higher AUROC values for diagnostic imaging findings (ductal communication: 0.887‒0.938 vs. 0.816‒0.827 and enhanced mural nodule: 0.843‒0.916 vs. 0.785‒0.801), although DLR did not directly improve sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Interobserver agreement for qualitative assessments was higher in CT with DLR (κ = 0.69‒0.82 vs. 0.57‒0.73).
CONCLUSION: DLR improved image quality and diagnostic performance by effectively reducing image noise and improving lesion conspicuity in the diagnosis of PCNs on UHR-CT. The DLR demonstrated greater diagnostic confidence for the assessment of imaging findings associated with PCNs.