Deep-learning reconstruction for the evaluation of lumbar spinal stenosis in computed tomography

Deep learning reconstruction for high-resolution computed tomography images of the temporal bone: comparison with hybrid iterative reconstruction

PURPOSE

We investigated whether the quality of high-resolution computed tomography (CT) images of the temporal bone improves with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) compared with hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR).

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 36 patients (15 men, 21 women; age, 53.9 ± 19.5 years) who had undergone high-resolution CT of the temporal bone. Axial and coronal images were reconstructed using DLR, HIR, and filtered back projection (FBP). In qualitative image analyses, two radiologists independently compared the DLR and HIR images with FBP in terms of depiction of structures, image noise, and overall quality, using a 5-point scale (5 = better than FBP, 1 = poorer than FBP) to evaluate image quality. The other two radiologists placed regions of interest on the tympanic cavity and measured the standard deviation of CT attenuation (i.e., quantitative image noise). Scores from the qualitative and quantitative analyses of the DLR and HIR images were compared using, respectively, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the paired t-test.

RESULTS

Qualitative and quantitative image noise was significantly reduced in DLR images compared with HIR images (all comparisons, p ≤ 0.016). Depiction of the otic capsule, auditory ossicles, and tympanic membrane was significantly improved in DLR images compared with HIR images (both readers, p ≤ 0.003). Overall image quality was significantly superior in DLR images compared with HIR images (both readers, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Compared with HIR, DLR provided significantly better-quality high-resolution CT images of the temporal bone.

Deep-Learning Reconstruction of High-Resolution CT Improves Interobserver Agreement for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Fibrosis

Objective: This study aimed to investigate whether deep-learning reconstruction (DLR) improves interobserver agreement in the evaluation of honeycombing for patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) who underwent high-resolution computed tomography (CT) compared with hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR). Methods: In this retrospective study, 35 consecutive patients suspected of ILD who underwent CT including the chest region were included. High-resolution CT images of the unilateral lung with DLR and HIR were reconstructed for the right and left lungs. A radiologist placed regions of interest on the lung and measured standard deviation of CT attenuation (i.e., quantitative image noise). In the qualitative image analyses, 5 blinded readers assessed the presence of honeycombing and reticulation, qualitative image noise, artifacts, and overall image quality using a 5-point scale (except for artifacts which was evaluated using a 3-point scale). Results: The quantitative and qualitative image noise in DLR was remarkably reduced compared to that in HIR (P < .001). Artifacts and overall DLR quality were significantly improved compared to those of HIR (P < .001 for 4 out of 5 readers). Interobserver agreement in the evaluations of honeycombing and reticulation for DLR (0.557 [0.450-0.693] and 0.525 [0.470-0.541], respectively) were higher than those for HIR (0.321 [0.211-0.520] and 0.470 [0.354-0.533], respectively). A statistically significant difference was found for honeycombing (P = .014). Conclusions: DLR improved interobserver agreement in the evaluation of honeycombing in patients with ILD on CT compared to HIR.

Detection of Vertebral Mass and Diagnosis of Spinal Cord Compression in Computed Tomography With Deep Learning Reconstruction: Comparison With Hybrid Iterative Reconstruction

PURPOSE

To compare the impact of deep learning reconstruction (DLR) and hybrid-iterative reconstruction (hybrid-IR) on vertebral mass depiction, detection, and diagnosis of spinal cord compression on computed tomography (CT).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 29 and 20 patients with and without vertebral masses. CT images were reconstructed using DLR and hybrid-IR. Three readers performed vertebral mass detection tests and evaluated the presence of spinal cord compression, the depiction of vertebral masses, and image noise. Quantitative image noise was measured by placing regions of interest on the aorta and spinal cord.

RESULTS

Deep learning reconstruction tended to improve the performance of readers with less diagnostic imaging experience in detecting vertebral masses (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = .892-.966) compared with hybrid-IR (AUC = .839-.917). Diagnostic performance in evaluating spinal cord compression in DLR (AUC = .887-.995) also improved compared with that in hybrid-IR (AUC = .866-.942) for some readers. The depiction of vertebral masses and subjective image noise in DLR were significantly improved compared with those in hybrid-IR (P < .041). Quantitative image noise in DLR was also significantly reduced compared with that in hybrid-IR (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Deep learning reconstruction improved the depiction of vertebral masses, which resulted in a tendency to improve the performance of CT compared to hybrid-IR in detecting vertebral masses and diagnosing spinal cord compression for some readers.