2022
DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac7999
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Deep learning versus iterative reconstruction on image quality and dose reduction in abdominal CT: a live animal study

Abstract: Objective: While simulated low-dose CT images and phantom studies cannot fully approximate subjective and objective effects of deep learning (DL) denoising on image quality, live animal models may afford this assessment. This study is to investigate the potential of DL in CT dose reduction on image quality compared to iterative reconstruction (IR). Approach: The upper abdomen of a live 4-year-old sheep was scanned on a CT scanner at different exposure levels. Images were reconstructed using FBP and ADMIRE wit… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While a previous study has shown that there is a strong correlation between SSIM and radiologists’ evaluations for diagnostic quality and low‐contrast detectability and a moderate correlation for texture, 167 these metrics share the limitation of not perfectly mirroring human visual perception. They often involve subjective elements, like image partitioning or region selection, which may not fully encompass the complexity or diagnostic importance of the image content.…”
Section: Training Validation and Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…While a previous study has shown that there is a strong correlation between SSIM and radiologists’ evaluations for diagnostic quality and low‐contrast detectability and a moderate correlation for texture, 167 these metrics share the limitation of not perfectly mirroring human visual perception. They often involve subjective elements, like image partitioning or region selection, which may not fully encompass the complexity or diagnostic importance of the image content.…”
Section: Training Validation and Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Evaluating a DL denoising model involves assessing its ability to effectively reduce noise while preserving important image details. Generated denoised images are usually compared against the ground truth images such as FBP, 164 , 165 , 166 IR, 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 or other DL methods. 158 , 159 , 163 , 171 , 172 , 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 182 This comparison can provide insights into the model's relative strengths and weaknesses in terms of denoising performance.…”
Section: Training Validation and Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%