Published in

SAGE Publications, The Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal, 2024

DOI: 10.1177/08465371241228468

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

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

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

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.