ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Quantitative and qualitative assessment of ultra-low-dose paranasal sinus CT using deep learning image reconstruction: a comparison with hybrid iterative reconstruction.
Article in European radiology, 2025. 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.
- Transferability of radiomics models between deep learning and conventional CT reconstruction algorithms: A task-based assessment for stratifying acute pancreatitis severity.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the quantitative and qualitative performances of ultra-low-dose computed tomography (CT) with deep learning image reconstruction (DLR) compared with those of hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR) for preoperative paranasal sinus (PNS) imaging. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective analysis included 132 patients who underwent non-contrast ultra-low-dose sinus CT (0.03 mSv). Images were reconstructed using hybrid IR and DLR. Objective image quality metrics, including image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), noise power spectrum (NPS), and no-reference perceptual image sharpness, were assessed. Two board-certified radiologists independently performed subjective image quality evaluations.
resultsThe ultra-low-dose CT protocol achieved a low radiation dose (effective dose: 0.03 mSv). DLR showed significantly lower image noise (28.62 ± 4.83 Hounsfield units) compared to hybrid IR (140.70 ± 16.04, p < 0.001), with DLR yielding smoother and more uniform images. DLR demonstrated significantly improved SNR (22.47 ± 5.82 vs 9.14 ± 2.45, p < 0.001) and CNR (71.88 ± 14.03 vs 11.81 ± 1.50, p < 0.001). NPS analysis revealed that DLR reduced the noise magnitude and NPS peak values. Additionally, DLR demonstrated significantly sharper images (no-reference perceptual sharpness metric: 0.56 ± 0.04) compared to hybrid IR (0.36 ± 0.01). Radiologists rated DLR as superior in overall image quality, bone structure visualization, and diagnostic confidence compared to hybrid IR at ultra-low-dose CT.
conclusionDLR significantly outperformed hybrid IR in ultra-low-dose PNS CT by reducing image noise, improving SNR and CNR, enhancing image sharpness, and maintaining critical anatomical visualization, demonstrating its potential for effective preoperative planning with minimal radiation exposure. KEY POINTS: Question Ultra-low-dose CT for paranasal sinuses is essential for patients requiring repeated scans and functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) planning to reduce cumulative radiation exposure. Findings DLR outperformed hybrid IR in ultra-low-dose paranasal sinus CT. Clinical relevance Ultra-low-dose CT with DLR delivers sufficient image quality for detailed surgical planning, effectively minimizing unnecessary radiation exposure to enhance patient safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40514598What 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.