Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33389036›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2021

Diagnostic value of deep learning reconstruction for radiation dose reduction at abdominal ultra-high-resolution CT.

Yuko Nakamura, Keigo Narita, Toru Higaki, Motonori Akagi, Yukiko Honda, Kazuo Awai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. State-of-the-Art Deep Learning CT Reconstruction Algorithms in Abdominal Imaging.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yuko NakamuraDiagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan. yukon@hiroshima-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3128-4731
Keigo NaritaDiagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Toru HigakiDiagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Motonori AkagiDiagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Yukiko HondaDiagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Kazuo AwaiDiagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.

Funding

Canon Medical Systems A1700878
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe evaluated lower dose (LD) hepatic dynamic ultra-high-resolution computed tomography (U-HRCT) images reconstructed with deep learning reconstruction (DLR), hybrid iterative reconstruction (hybrid-IR), or model-based IR (MBIR) in comparison with standard-dose (SD) U-HRCT images reconstructed with hybrid-IR as the reference standard to identify the method that allowed for the greatest radiation dose reduction while preserving the diagnostic value.

methodsEvaluated were 72 patients who had undergone hepatic dynamic U-HRCT; 36 were scanned with the standard radiation dose (SD group) and 36 with 70% of the SD (lower dose [LD] group). Hepatic arterial and equilibrium phase (HAP, EP) images were reconstructed with hybrid-IR in the SD group, and with hybrid-IR, MBIR, and DLR in the LD group. One radiologist recorded the standard deviation of attenuation in the paraspinal muscle as the image noise. The overall image quality was assessed by 3 other radiologists; they used a 5-point confidence scale ranging from 1 (unacceptable) to 5 (excellent). Superiority and equivalence with prespecified margins were assessed.

resultsWith respect to the image noise, in the HAP and EP, LD DLR and LD MBIR images were superior to SD hybrid-IR images; LD hybrid-IR images were neither superior nor equivalent to SD hybrid-IR images. With respect to the quality scores, only LD DLR images were superior to SD hybrid-IR images.

conclusionsDLR preserved the quality of abdominal U-HRCT images even when scanned with a reduced radiation dose. KEY POINTS: • Lower dose DLR images were superior to the standard-dose hybrid-IR images quantitatively and qualitatively at abdominal U-HRCT. • Neither hybrid-IR nor MBIR may allow for a radiation dose reduction at abdominal U-HRCT without compromising the image quality. • Because DLR allows for a reduction in the radiation dose and maintains the image quality even at the thinnest slice section, DLR should be applied to abdominal U-HRCT scans.

Indexed as

Deep LearningAlgorithmsDrug TaperingHumansRadiation DosageRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedDeep learningLiverRadiation dosageTomography, X-ray computed

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.