Effect of reconstruction methods and x-ray tube current-time product on nodule detection in an anthropomorphic thorax phantom: A crossed-modality JAFROC observer study

Evaluation of Image Quality for 7 Iterative Reconstruction Algorithms in Chest Computed Tomography Imaging: A Phantom Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the image quality of 7 iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms in comparison to filtered back-projection (FBP) algorithm.

METHODS

An anthropomorphic chest phantom was scanned on 4 computed tomography scanners and reconstructed with FBP and IR algorithms. Image quality of anatomical details-large/medium-sized pulmonary vessels, small pulmonary vessels, thoracic wall, and small and large lesions-was scored. Furthermore, general impression of noise, image contrast, and artifacts were evaluated. Visual grading regression was used to analyze the data. Standard deviations were measured, and the noise power spectrum was calculated.

RESULTS

Iterative reconstruction algorithms showed significantly better results when compared with FBP for these criteria (regression coefficients/P values in parentheses): vessels (FIRST: -1.8/0.05, AIDR Enhanced: <-2.3/0.01, Veo: <-0.1/0.03, ADMIRE: <-2.1/0.04), lesions (FIRST: <-2.6/0.01, AIDR Enhanced: <-1.9/0.03, IMR1: <-2.7/0.01, Veo: <-2.4/0.02, ADMIRE: -2.3/0.02), image noise (FIRST: <-3.2/0.004, AIDR Enhanced: <-3.5/0.002, IMR1: <-6.1/0.001, iDose: <-2.3/0.02, Veo: <-3.4/0.002, ADMIRE: <-3.5/0.02), image contrast (FIRST: -2.3/0.01, AIDR Enhanced: -2.5/0.01, IMR1: -3.7/0.001, iDose: -2.1/0.02), and artifacts (FIRST: <-3.8/0.004, AIDR Enhanced: <-2.7/0.02, IMR1: <-2.6/0.02, iDose: -2.1/0.04, Veo: -2.6/0.02). The iDose algorithm was the only IR algorithm that maintained the noise frequencies.

CONCLUSIONS

Iterative reconstruction algorithms performed differently on all evaluated criteria, showing the importance of careful implementation of algorithms for diagnostic purposes.

A JAFROC study of nodule detection performance in CT images of a thorax acquired during PET/CT

PURPOSE

Two types of CT images (modalities) are acquired in PET/CT: for attenuation correction (AC) and diagnosis. The purpose of the study was to compare nodule detection and localization performance between these two modalities.

METHODS

CT images, using both modalities, of an anthropomorphic chest phantom containing zero or more simulated spherical nodules of 5, 8, 10 and 12 mm diameters and contrasts -800, -630 and 100 HU were acquired. An observer performance study using nine observers interpreting 45 normal (zero nodules) images and 47 abnormal images (1-3 nodules; average 1.26) was conducted using the free-response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) paradigm. Data were analysed using an R software package implemented jackknife alternative FROC (JAFROC) analysis. Both empirical areas under the equally weighted AFROC curve (wAFROC) and under the highest rating inferred ROC (HR-ROC) curve were used as figures of merit (FOM). To control the probability of Type I error test alpha was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

Nodule detection as measured by either FOM was significantly better on the diagnostic quality images (2nd modality), irrespective of the method of analysis, [reader averaged inter-modality wAFROC FOM difference = -0.07 (-0.11,-0.04); reader averaged inter-modality HR-ROC FOM difference = -0.05 (-0.09, -0.01)].

CONCLUSION

Nodule detection was statistically worse on images acquired for AC; suggesting that images acquired for AC should not be used to evaluate pulmonary pathology.

Blurred digital mammography images: an analysis of technical recall and observer detection performance

OBJECTIVE

Blurred images in full-field digital mammography are a problem in the UK Breast Screening Programme. Technical recalls may be due to blurring not being seen on lower resolution monitors used for review. This study assesses the visual detection of blurring on a 2.3-MP monitor and a 5-MP report grade monitor and proposes an observer standard for the visual detection of blurring on a 5-MP reporting grade monitor.

METHODS

28 observers assessed 120 images for blurring; 20 images had no blurring present, whereas 100 images had blurring imposed through mathematical simulation at 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0 mm levels of motion. Technical recall rate for both monitors and angular size at each level of motion were calculated. χ2 tests were used to test whether significant differences in blurring detection existed between 2.3- and 5-MP monitors.

RESULTS

The technical recall rate for 2.3- and 5-MP monitors are 20.3% and 9.1%, respectively. The angular size for 0.2- to 1-mm motion varied from 55 to 275 arc s. The minimum amount of motion for visual detection of blurring in this study is 0.4 mm. For 0.2-mm simulated motion, there was no significant difference [χ2 (1, N = 1095) = 1.61, p = 0.20] in blurring detection between the 2.3- and 5-MP monitors.

CONCLUSION

According to this study, monitors ≤2.3 MP are not suitable for technical review of full-field digital mammography images for the detection of blur. Advances in knowledge: This research proposes the first observer standard for the visual detection of blurring.