Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35448709›Full record

ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2022

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

Andreas S Brendlin, Arne Estler, David Plajer, Adrian Lutz, Gerd Grözinger, Malte N Bongers, Ilias Tsiflikas, Saif Afat, Christoph P Artzner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Andreas S BrendlinDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5961-9727
Arne EstlerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1930-7497
David PlajerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Adrian LutzDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Gerd GrözingerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Malte N BongersDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Ilias TsiflikasDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7166-4689
Saif AfatDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6861-6245
Christoph P ArtznerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls University, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(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.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCone-Beam Computed TomographyHumansSignal-To-Noise RatioAI (artificial intelligence)cone beam computed tomographyimage quality enhancement

Identifiers

PMID35448709
PMCPMC9031402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.