ArticleSichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition2021
[Application of Deep Learning Reconstruction Algorithm in Low-Dose Thin-Slice Liver CT of Healthy Volunteers].
Article in Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Deep Learning Reconstruction Algorithm Combined With Smart Metal Artifact Reduction Technique Improves Image Quality of Upper Abdominal CT in Critically Ill Patients].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the clinical feasibility of applying deep learning (DL) reconstruction algorithm in low-dose thin-slice liver CT examination of healthy volunteers by comparing the reconstruction algorithm based on DL, filtered back projection (FBP) reconstruction algorithm and iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithm.
methodsA standard water phantom with a diameter of 180 mm was scanned, using the 160 slice multi-detector CT scanning of United Imaging Healthcare, to compare the noise power spectrums of DL, FBP and IR algorithms. 100 healthy volunteers were prospectively enrolled, with 50 assigned to the normal dose group (ND) and 50 to the low dose group (LD). IR algorithm was used in the ND group to reconstruct images, while DL, FBP and IR algorithms were used in the LD group to reconstruct images. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the liver CT values, the liver noise, liver signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast noise ratio (CNR) and figure of merit (FOM) of the images of ND-IR, LD-FBP, LD-IR and LD-DL. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyse subjective scores of anatomical structures.
resultsThe DL algorithm had the lowest average peak value of noise power spectrum, and its shape was similar to that of medium-level IR algorithm. Liver CT values of ND-IR, LD-FBP, LD-IR and LD-DL did not show statistically significant difference. The noise of LD-DL was lower than that of LD-FBP, LD-IR and ND-IR (
conclusionThe DL algorithm with noise shape similar to the medium iterative grade IR commonly used in clinical practice showed higher noise reduction ability than IR did. Compared with FBP, the DL algorithm had smoother noise shape, but much better noise reduction ability. The application of DL algorithm in low-dose thin-slice liver CT of healthy volunteers can help achieve the standard image quality of liver CT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.