Deep Learning Reconstruction Algorithm Combined With Smart Metal Artifact Reduction Technique Improves Image Quality of Upper Abdominal CT in Critically Ill Patients

PAN Yunlong, YAO Xiaoling, GAO Ronghui, XIE Wei, XIA Chunchao, LI Zhenlin, SUN Huaiqiang

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effect of deep learning reconstruction algorithm combined with smart metal artifact reduction (DLMAR) on the quality of abdominal CT images in critically ill patients who are unable to raise their arms and require electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring.

Methods A total of 102 patients were retrospectively enrolled. All subjects were critically ill patients who were unable to raise their arms and required ECG monitoring. Images were reconstructed using 6 algorithms, including filtered back projection (FBP), iterative reconstruction (IR), deep learning (DL), FBP combined with smart metal artifact reduction (FBPMAR), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V combined with smart metal artifact reduction (IRMAR), and DLMAR. A quantitative analysis of CT values, noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was conducted in regions without metal artifacts and regions with metal artifacts in the liver, as well as the tissues, including those from the liver, spleen, pancreas, and aorta, between the two arms. Qualitative analysis of electrode metal artifacts, the visualization of the structures between the two arms, and image noise was performed with a 5-point scoring system (1=worst and 5=best).

Results In the regions of the liver with metal artifacts, there was a significant difference between the CT values of the DLMAR group ([98.5±9.8] Hounsfield units [HU]) and those of the FBP group ([73.7±5.6] HU), the IR group ([75.3±7.5] HU), and the DL group ([66.3±11.4] HU) (P<0.01). There was no significant difference between the CT values of the DLMAR group and those of the FBPMAR group ([99.8±4.8] HU) and the IRMAR group ([99.6±3.4] HU) (P>0.05). The noise of the DLMAR group was found to be significantly lower than that of the other groups (P<0.01). Furthermore, the SNR and CNR of the DLMAR group were also found to be higher than those of the other groups (P<0.01). In the tissue region between the two arms, the differences in CT values among the six groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05). The noise of the DLMAR group was lower than those of the other groups (P<0.01), and the SNR and CNR of the DLMAR group were higher than those of the other groups (P<0.01). In terms of the removal of metal artifacts, the scores of the FBPMAR, IRMAR, and DLMAR groups (4.27±0.32, 4.44±0.34, and 4.61±0.28, respectively) were higher than those of the FBP, IR, and DL groups (1.36±0.54, 1.32±0.45, and 1.24±0.46, respectively) (P<0.01). The DLMAR group also had a higher score of 4.62±0.37 in the visualization of structures between the two arms and 4.53±0.39 in the noise reduction of images, both of which were higher than those of the other groups (P<0.01).

Conclusion DLMAR reduces artifacts, decreases noise, and improves the quality of abdominal CT imaging in critically ill patients who are unable to raise their arms and require ECG monitoring.

 

Keywords: Deep learning, Metal artifact, Critically ill patients, Abdominal CT

 

Full Text:

PDF


References


ACQUISTO N M, MOSIER J M, BITTNER E A, et al. Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines for rapid sequence intubation in the critically ill adult patient. Crit Care Med, 2023, 51(10): 1411-1430. doi: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000006000.

LANSIER A, BOURILLON C, CUÉNOD C A, et al. CT-based diagnostic algorithm to identify bowel and/or mesenteric injury in patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Eur Radiol, 2023, 33(3): 1918-1927. doi: 10. 1007/s00330-022-09200-9.

FATHI M, MIRJAFARI A, YAGHOOBPOOR S, et al. Diagnostic utility of whole-body computed tomography/pan-scan in trauma: a systematic review and meta-analysis study. Emerg Radiol, 2024, 31(2): 251-268. doi: 10.1007/s10140-024-02213-5.

ACHATZ G, SCHWABE K, BRILL S, et al. Diagnostic options for blunt abdominal trauma. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2022, 48(5): 3575-3589. doi: 10.1007/s00068-020-01405-1.

BENNEKER L M, BONEL H, ZUMSTEIN M, et al. A novel multiple-trauma CT-scanning protocol using patient repositioning may increase risks of iatrogenic injuries. Emerg Radiol, 2007, 13: 349-351. doi: 10.1007/s10140-007-0577-1.

SELLES M, Van OSCH J A C, MAAS M, et al. Advances in metal artifact reduction in CT images: A review of traditional and novel metal artifact reduction techniques. Eur J Radiol, 2024, 170: 111276. doi: 10.1016/j. ejrad.2023.111276.

HODGETTS T J, KENWARD G, VLACHONIKOLIS I G, et al. The identification of risk factors for cardiac arrest and formulation of activation criteria to alert a medical emergency team. Resuscitation, 2002, 54(2): 125-131. doi: 10.1016/s0300-9572(02)00100-4.

YASAKA K, FURUTA T, KUBO T, et al. Full and hybrid iterative reconstruction to reduce artifacts in abdominal CT for patients scanned without arm elevation. Acta Radiol, 2017, 58(9): 1085-1093. doi: 10.1177/ 0284185116684675.

KATARIA B, NILSSON ALTHÉN J, SMEDBY Ö, et al. Image quality and potential dose reduction using advanced modeled iterative reconstruction (admire) in abdominal CT--a review. Radiat Prot Dosimetry, 2021, 195(3/4): 177-187. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncab020.

MILETO A, GUIMARAES L S, MCCOLLOUGH C H, et al. State of the art in abdominal CT: the limits of iterative reconstruction algorithms. Radiology, 2019, 293(3): 491-503. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019191422.

MüCK J, REITER E, KLINGERT W, et al. Towards safer imaging: A comparative study of deep learning-based denoising and iterative reconstruction in intraindividual low-dose CT scans using an in-vivo large animal model. Eur J Radiol, 2024, 171: 111267. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad. 2023.111267.

ZENG L M, XU X, ZENG W, et al. Application of deep learning reconstruction algorithm in low-dose thin-slice liver CT of healthy volunteers. J Sichuan Univ (Med Sci), 2021, 52(5): 807-812. doi: 10.12182/ 20210660103.

BRANCO D, KRY S, TAYLOR P, et al. Evaluation of image quality of a novel computed tomography metal artifact management technique on an anthropomorphic head and neck phantom. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol, 2021, 17: 111-116. doi: 10.1016/j.phro.2021.01.007.

OOSTVEEN L J, SMIT E J, DEKKER H M, et al. Abdominopelvic CT image quality: evaluation of thin (0. 5-mm) slices using deep learning reconstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2023, 220(3): 381-388. doi: 10. 2214/AJR.22.28319.

BAYER J, PACHE G, STROHM P C, et al. Influence of arm positioning on radiation dose for whole body computed tomography in trauma patients. J Trauma, 2011, 70(4): 900-905. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013 e3181edc80e.

KAHN J, GRUPP U, MAURER M. How does arm positioning of polytraumatized patients in the initial computed tomography (CT) affect image quality and diagnostic accuracy? Eur J Radiol, 2014, 83(1): e67-e71. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.10.002.

FLEISCHMANN D, EDWARD BOAS F. Computed tomography--old ideas and new technology. Eur Radiol, 2011, 21(3): 510-517. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2056-z.

UNGANIA S, SOLIVETTI F M, D'ARIENZO M, et al. New-generation ASiR-V for dose reduction while maintaining image quality in CT: a phantom study. Applied Sciences, 2023, 13(9): 5639-5650. doi: 10.3390/app13095639.

KAWASHIMA H, ICHIKAWA K, TAKATA T, et al. Algorithm-based artifact reduction in patients with arms-down positioning in computed tomography. Phys Med, 2020, 69: 61-69. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.11.019.

SOLOMON J, LYU P, MARIN D, et al. Noise and spatial resolution properties of a commercially available deep learning‐based CT reconstruction algorithm. Med Phys, 2020, 47(9): 3961-3971. doi: 10. 1002/mp.14319.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.