Objective: This study aimed to conduct objective and subjective comparisons of image quality among abdominal computed tomography (CT) reconstructions with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) algorithms, model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), and filtered back projection (FBP). Methods: Datasets from consecutive patients who underwent low-dose liver CT were retrospectively identified. Images were reconstructed using DLR, MBIR, and FBP. Mean image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated, and noise, artifacts, sharpness, and overall image quality were subjectively assessed. Dunnett’s test was used for statistical comparisons. Results: Ninety patients (67 ± 12.7 years; 63 males; mean body mass index [BMI], 25.5 kg/m2) were included. The mean noise in the abdominal aorta and hepatic parenchyma of DLR was lower than that in FBP and MBIR (p < .001). For FBP and MBIR, image noise was significantly higher for obese patients than for those with normal BMI. The CNR for the abdominal aorta and hepatic parenchyma was higher for DLR than for FBP and MBIR (p < .001). MBIR images were subjectively rated as superior to FBP images in terms of noise, artifacts, sharpness, and overall quality (p < .001). DLR images were rated as superior to MBIR images in terms of noise (p < .001) and overall quality (p = .03). Conclusions: Based on objective and subjective comparisons, the image quality of DLR was found to be superior to that of MBIR and FBP on low-dose abdominal CT. DLR was the only method for which image noise was not higher for obese patients than for those with a normal BMI. Advances in knowledge: This study provides previously unavailable information on the properties of DLR systems and their clinical utility.

We aimed to compare the radiation dose and image quality of a low-dose abdominal computed tomography (CT) protocol reconstructed with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) with those of a routine-dose protocol reconstructed with hybrid-iterative reconstruction. This retrospective study enrolled 71 patients [61 men; average age, 71.9 years; mean body mass index (BMI), 24.3 kg/m 2 ] who underwent both low-dose abdominal CT with DLR [advanced intelligent clear-IQ engine (AiCE)] and routine-dose abdominal CT with hybrid-iterative reconstruction [adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D (AIDR 3D)]. Radiation dose parameters included volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), effective dose (ED), and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE). Mean image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR)were calculated. Image noise was measured in the hepatic parenchyma and bilateral erector spinae muscles. Moreover, subjective assessment of perceived image quality and diagnostic acceptability was performed. The low-dose protocol helped reduce the CTDIvol by 44.3%, ED by 43.7%, and SSDE by 44.9%. Moreover, the noise was significantly lower and CNR significantly higher with the low-dose protocol than with the normal-dose protocol (P<0.001). In the subjective assessment of image quality, there was no significant difference between the protocols with regard to image noise. Overall, AiCE was superior to AIDR 3D in terms of diagnostic acceptability (P=0.001). The use of AiCE can reduce overall radiation dose by more than 40% without loss of image quality compared to routine-dose abdominal CT with AIDR 3D.

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the novel image-based noise reduction software (NRS) improves image quality, and to assess the feasibility of using this software in combination with hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR) in image quality on thin-slice abdominal CT. In this retrospective study, 54 patients who underwent dynamic liver CT between April and July 2017 and had a body mass index higher than 25 kg/m2 were included. Three image sets of each patient were reconstructed as follows: hybrid IR images with 1-mm slice thickness (group A), hybrid IR images with 5-mm slice thickness (group B), and hybrid IR images with 1-mm slice thickness denoised using NRS (group C). The mean image noise and contrast-to-noise ratio relative to the muscle of the aorta and liver were assessed. Subjective image quality was evaluated by two radiologists for sharpness, noise, contrast, and overall quality using 5-point scales. The mean image noise was significantly lower in group C than in group A (p < 0.01), but no significant difference was observed between groups B and C. The contrast-to-noise ratio was significantly higher in group C than in group A (p < 0.01 and p = 0.01, respectively). Subjective image quality was also significantly higher in group C than in group A (p < 0.01), in terms of noise and overall quality, but not in terms of sharpness and contrast (p = 0.65 and 0.07, respectively). The contrast of images in group C was greater than that in group A, but this difference was not significant. Compared with hybrid IR alone, the novel NRS combined with a hybrid IR could result in significant noise reduction without sacrificing image quality on CT. This combined approach will likely be particularly useful for thin-slice abdominal CT examinations of overweight patients.

No abstract