Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Charting the Path Forward: CT Image Quality Assessment -- An In-Depth Review

Published 30 Apr 2024 in eess.IV | (2405.00075v1)

Abstract: Computed Tomography (CT) is a frequently utilized imaging technology that is employed in the clinical diagnosis of many disorders. However, clinical diagnosis, data storage, and management are posed huge challenges by a huge volume of non-homogeneous CT data in terms of imaging quality. As a result, the quality assessment of CT images is a crucial problem that demands consideration. The history, advancements in research, and current developments in CT image quality assessment (IQA) are examined in this paper. In this review, we collected and researched more than 500 CT-IQA publications published before August 2023. And we provide the visualization analysis of keywords and co-citations in the knowledge graph of these papers. Prospects and obstacles for the continued development of CT-IQA are also covered. At present, significant research branches in the CT-IQA domain include Phantom study, Artificial intelligence deep-learning reconstruction algorithm, Dose reduction opportunity, and Virtual monoenergetic reconstruction. AI-based CT-IQA also becomes a trend. It increases the accuracy of the CT scanning apparatus, amplifies the impact of the CT system reconstruction algorithm, and creates an effective algorithm for post-processing CT images. AI-based medical IQA offers excellent application opportunities in clinical work. AI can provide uniform quality assessment criteria and more comprehensive guidance amongst various healthcare facilities, and encourage them to identify one another's images. It will help lower the number of unnecessary tests and associated costs, and enhance the quality of medical imaging and assessment efficiency.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (111)
  1. G. D. Rubin, “Computed tomography: revolutionizing the practice of medicine for 40 years,” Radiology, vol. 273, no. 2S, pp. S45–S74, 2014.
  2. S. Dash, S. K. Shakyawar, M. Sharma, and S. Kaushik, “Big data in healthcare: management, analysis and future prospects,” Journal of big data, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–25, 2019.
  3. E. Soares, H. Barrett, and E. Krupinski, “Noise properties of attenuation correction methods for spect,” in 1993 IEEE Conference Record Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference.   IEEE, 1993, pp. 1409–1413.
  4. M. K. Kalra, M. M. Maher, R. D’Souza, and S. Saini, “Multidetector computed tomography technology: current status and emerging developments,” Journal of computer assisted tomography, vol. 28, pp. S2–S6, 2004.
  5. K. Okarma, “Current trends and advances in image quality assessment,” Elektronika ir Elektrotechnika, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 77–84, 2019.
  6. K. Joy and E. G. Sarma, “Recent developments in image quality assessment algorithms: A review.” Journal of Theoretical & Applied Information Technology, vol. 65, no. 1, 2014.
  7. R. K. Mantiuk, A. Tomaszewska, and R. Mantiuk, “Comparison of four subjective methods for image quality assessment,” in Computer graphics forum, vol. 31, no. 8.   Wiley Online Library, 2012, pp. 2478–2491.
  8. L. Kang, P. Ye, Y. Li, and D. Doermann, “Convolutional neural networks for no-reference image quality assessment,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2014, pp. 1733–1740.
  9. S. Bosse, D. Maniry, K.-R. Müller, T. Wiegand, and W. Samek, “Deep neural networks for no-reference and full-reference image quality assessment,” IEEE Transactions on image processing, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 206–219, 2017.
  10. S. Bianco, L. Celona, P. Napoletano, and R. Schettini, “On the use of deep learning for blind image quality assessment,” Signal, Image and Video Processing, vol. 12, pp. 355–362, 2018.
  11. R. Reisenhofer, S. Bosse, G. Kutyniok, and T. Wiegand, “A haar wavelet-based perceptual similarity index for image quality assessment,” Signal Processing: Image Communication, vol. 61, pp. 33–43, 2018.
  12. R. Zhang, P. Isola, A. A. Efros, E. Shechtman, and O. Wang, “The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2018, pp. 586–595.
  13. Z. Wang, E. P. Simoncelli, and A. C. Bovik, “Multiscale structural similarity for image quality assessment,” in The Thrity-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems & Computers, 2003, vol. 2.   Ieee, 2003, pp. 1398–1402.
  14. K. Das, J. Jiang, and J. Rao, “Mean squared error of empirical predictor,” 2004.
  15. A. Hore and D. Ziou, “Image quality metrics: Psnr vs. ssim,” in 2010 20th international conference on pattern recognition.   IEEE, 2010, pp. 2366–2369.
  16. H. R. Sheikh and A. C. Bovik, “A visual information fidelity approach to video quality assessment,” in The first international workshop on video processing and quality metrics for consumer electronics, vol. 7, no. 2.   sn, 2005, pp. 2117–2128.
  17. L. Zhang, Y. Shen, and H. Li, “Vsi: A visual saliency-induced index for perceptual image quality assessment,” IEEE Transactions on Image processing, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 4270–4281, 2014.
  18. R. Li, G. Dai, Z. Wang, S. Yu, and Y. Xie, “Using signal-to-noise ratio to connect the quality assessment of natural and medical images,” in Tenth International Conference on Digital Image Processing (ICDIP 2018), vol. 10806.   SPIE, 2018, pp. 1327–1332.
  19. L. S. Chow and H. Rajagopal, “Modified-brisque as no reference image quality assessment for structural mr images,” Magnetic resonance imaging, vol. 43, pp. 74–87, 2017.
  20. M. Oszust, A. Piórkowski, and R. Obuchowicz, “No-reference image quality assessment of magnetic resonance images with high-boost filtering and local features,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 1648–1660, 2020.
  21. K. Lei, A. B. Syed, X. Zhu, J. M. Pauly, and S. S. Vasanawala, “Artifact-and content-specific quality assessment for mri with image rulers,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 77, p. 102344, 2022.
  22. S. Liu, K.-H. Thung, W. Lin, D. Shen, and P.-T. Yap, “Hierarchical nonlocal residual networks for image quality assessment of pediatric diffusion mri with limited and noisy annotations,” IEEE transactions on medical imaging, vol. 39, no. 11, pp. 3691–3702, 2020.
  23. A. Mason, J. Rioux, S. E. Clarke, A. Costa, M. Schmidt, V. Keough, T. Huynh, and S. Beyea, “Comparison of objective image quality metrics to expert radiologists’ scoring of diagnostic quality of mr images,” IEEE transactions on medical imaging, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 1064–1072, 2019.
  24. I. Stepien and M. Oszust, “A brief survey on no-reference image quality assessment methods for magnetic resonance images,” Journal of Imaging, vol. 8, no. 6, p. 160, 2022.
  25. S. Kastryulin, J. Zakirov, N. Pezzotti, and D. V. Dylov, “Image quality assessment for magnetic resonance imaging,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 14 154–14 168, 2023.
  26. L. S. Chow and R. Paramesran, “Review of medical image quality assessment,” Biomedical signal processing and control, vol. 27, pp. 145–154, 2016.
  27. C. Chen, “Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 101, no. suppl_1, pp. 5303–5310, 2004.
  28. ——, “Citespace ii: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature,” Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 359–377, 2006.
  29. C. Chen, F. Ibekwe-SanJuan, and J. Hou, “The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis,” Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, vol. 61, no. 7, pp. 1386–1409, 2010.
  30. C. Chen, “Predictive effects of structural variation on citation counts,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 431–449, 2012.
  31. O. Suleiman, B. Conway, F. Rueter, J. McCrohan, R. Slayton, and R. Antonsen, “The united states experience in patient dose and image quality,” Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol. 57, no. 1-4, pp. 101–104, 1995.
  32. M. Oresegun, J. LeHeron, C. Maccia, R. Padovani, and E. Vano, “Radiation protection and quality assurance in diagnostic radiology–an iaea coordinated research project in asia and eastern europe,” Applied radiation and Isotopes, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 271–276, 1999.
  33. D. Dey, C. J. Lee, M. Ohba, A. Gutstein, P. J. Slomka, V. Cheng, Y. Suzuki, S. Suzuki, A. Wolak, L. Le Meunier et al., “Image quality and artifacts in coronary ct angiography with dual-source ct: initial clinical experience,” Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 105–114, 2008.
  34. D. Nikolaev, A. Buzmakov, M. Chukalina, Y. Ivan, A. Gladkov, and A. Ingacheva, “Ct image quality assessment based on morphometric analysis of artifacts,” in 2016 International Conference on Robotics and Machine Vision, vol. 10253.   SPIE, 2017, pp. 52–56.
  35. F. E. Boas, D. Fleischmann et al., “Ct artifacts: causes and reduction techniques,” Imaging Med, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 229–240, 2012.
  36. T. Flohr, K. Stierstorfer, S. Ulzheimer, H. Bruder, A. Primak, and C. McCollough, “Image reconstruction and image quality evaluation for a 64-slice ct scanner with-flying focal spot,” Medical physics, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 2536–2547, 2005.
  37. J. Xu, D. Reh, J. Carey, M. Mahesh, and J. Siewerdsen, “Technical assessment of a cone-beam ct scanner for otolaryngology imaging: image quality, dose, and technique protocols,” Medical physics, vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 4932–4942, 2012.
  38. T. S. Patzer, A. S. Kunz, H. Huflage, K. S. Luetkens, N. Conrads, P. Gruschwitz, P. Pannenbecker, S. Ergün, T. A. Bley, and J.-P. Grunz, “Quantitative and qualitative image quality assessment in shoulder examinations with a first-generation photon-counting detector ct,” Scientific Reports, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 8226, 2023.
  39. V. Vardhanabhuti, R. J. Loader, G. R. Mitchell, R. D. Riordan, and C. A. Roobottom, “Image quality assessment of standard-and low-dose chest ct using filtered back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and novel model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 200, no. 3, pp. 545–552, 2013.
  40. J. Vaishnav, W. Jung, L. Popescu, R. Zeng, and K. Myers, “Objective assessment of image quality and dose reduction in ct iterative reconstruction,” Medical physics, vol. 41, no. 7, p. 071904, 2014.
  41. A. M. A. Roa, H. K. Andersen, and A. C. T. Martinsen, “Ct image quality over time: comparison of image quality for six different ct scanners over a six-year period,” Journal of applied clinical medical physics, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 350–365, 2015.
  42. K. D. Allert and F. A. DiBianca, “An automated image evaluation procedure for computed tomography systems,” in Medical Imaging 2005: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, vol. 5749.   SPIE, 2005, pp. 527–537.
  43. J. M. Wilson, O. I. Christianson, S. Richard, and E. Samei, “A methodology for image quality evaluation of advanced ct systems,” Medical physics, vol. 40, no. 3, p. 031908, 2013.
  44. J. Greffier, J. Frandon, A. Larbi, J. Beregi, and F. Pereira, “Ct iterative reconstruction algorithms: a task-based image quality assessment,” European radiology, vol. 30, pp. 487–500, 2020.
  45. Z. Al-Ameen, G. Sulong, A. Rehman, A. Al-Dhelaan, T. Saba, and M. Al-Rodhaan, “An innovative technique for contrast enhancement of computed tomography images using normalized gamma-corrected contrast-limited adaptive histogram equalization,” EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing, vol. 2015, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2015.
  46. P. B. Noël, E. Bendik, D. Münzel, A. Schneider, L. Goshen, A. Gringauz, Y. Lamash, A. Vlassenbroek, A. A. Fingerle, E. J. Rummeny et al., “A method for improving iodine contrast enhancement in abdominal computed tomography: experimental study in a pig model,” European radiology, vol. 23, pp. 985–990, 2013.
  47. K. S. Sim, S. Chung, and Y. Zheng, “Contrast enhancement brain infarction images using sigmoidal eliminating extreme level weight distributed histogram equalization,” Int. J. Innov. Comput. Inf. Control (IJICIC), vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1043–1056, 2018.
  48. Y. Zhu and Y. Ding, “Auto-optimized paralleled sinogram noise reduction method based on relative quality assessment for low-dose x-ray computed tomography,” Journal of Medical Imaging and Health Informatics, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 278–282, 2017.
  49. Y. Lee, “Feasibility study for application of total-variation-based noise-removal algorithm with 450-kvp high-energy industrial computed-tomography imaging system for non-destructive testing,” Experimental Techniques, vol. 43, pp. 117–123, 2019.
  50. S. Watanabe, K. Ichikawa, H. Kawashima, Y. Kono, H. Kosaka, K. Yamada, and K. Ishii, “Image quality comparison of a nonlinear image-based noise reduction technique with a hybrid-type iterative reconstruction for pediatric computed tomography,” Physica Medica, vol. 76, pp. 100–108, 2020.
  51. H. Zaidi, M.-L. Montandon, and A. Alavi, “The clinical role of fusion imaging using pet, ct, and mr imaging,” PET clinics, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 275–291, 2008.
  52. M. D. Naeemi, J. Ren, N. Hollcroft, A. M. Alessio, and S. Roychowdhury, “Application of big data analytics for automated estimation of ct image quality,” in 2016 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data).   IEEE, 2016, pp. 3422–3431.
  53. N. Hayashi, T. Maruyama, Y. Sato, H. Watanabe, T. Ogura, and A. Ogura, “Evaluating medical images using deep convolutional neural networks: A simulated ct phantom image study,” Technology and Health Care, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 113–120, 2020.
  54. W. Lee, E. Cho, W. Kim, H. Choi, K. S. Beck, H. J. Yoon, J. Baek, and J.-H. Choi, “No-reference perceptual ct image quality assessment based on a self-supervised learning framework,” Machine Learning: Science and Technology, vol. 3, no. 4, p. 045033, 2022.
  55. S. Li, J. He, Y. Wang, Y. Liao, D. Zeng, Z. Bian, and J. Ma, “Blind ct image quality assessment via deep learning strategy: initial study,” in Medical Imaging 2018: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, vol. 10577.   SPIE, 2018, pp. 293–297.
  56. M. Schwyzer, S. Skawran, A. G. Gennari, S. L. Waelti, J. E. Walter, A. Curioni-Fontecedro, M. Hofbauer, A. Maurer, M. W. Huellner, and M. Messerli, “Automated f18-fdg pet/ct image quality assessment using deep neural networks on a latest 6-ring digital detector system,” Scientific Reports, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 11332, 2023.
  57. L. Xia, H. Jebbari, O. Deforges, L. Zhang, L. Lévêque, and M. Outtas, “Denoised ct images quality assessment through covid-19 pneumonia detection task,” in 2023 15th International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX).   IEEE, 2023, pp. 183–188.
  58. G. Wang, C. Sun, Y. Liu, and H. Yang, “Optimization of ct image quality assessment metric based on genetic algorithm,” in 2022 IEEE 10th International Conference on Computer Science and Network Technology (ICCSNT).   IEEE, 2022, pp. 14–18.
  59. D. Pal, B. Patel, A. Wang et al., “Ssiqa: multi-task learning for non-reference ct image quality assessment with self-supervised noise level prediction,” in 2021 IEEE 18th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI).   IEEE, 2021, pp. 1962–1965.
  60. Q. Gao, M. Zhu, D. Li, Z. Bian, and J. Ma, “Ct image quality assessment based on prior information of pre-restored images,” Nan Fang yi ke da xue xue bao= Journal of Southern Medical University, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 230–237, 2021.
  61. J. Duan, J. Cai, S. Zhi, and X. Mou, “Blind ct image quality assessment model based on ct image statistics,” in The Fourth International Symposium on Image Computing and Digital Medicine, 2020, pp. 201–205.
  62. Q. Gao, S. Li, M. Zhu, D. Li, Z. Bian, Q. Lyu, D. Zeng, and J. Ma, “Blind ct image quality assessment via deep learning framework,” in 2019 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 1–4.
  63. Z. Chen, B. Hu, C. Niu, T. Chen, Y. Li, H. Shan, and G. Wang, “Iqagpt: Image quality assessment with vision-language and chatgpt models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.15663, 2023.
  64. C. Qi, S. Wang, H. Yu, Y. Zhang, P. Hu, H. Tan, Y. Shi, and H. Shi, “An artificial intelligence-driven image quality assessment system for whole-body [18f] fdg pet/ct,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 1318–1328, 2023.
  65. F. Yin, Z. Ji, J. Zhou, and H. Zhang, “Subjective assessment and perception model of pet/ct image quality,” vol, vol. 32, pp. 205–212, 2015.
  66. K. A. Gross and M. A. Kupinski, “Spect image quality assessment and system parameter optimization for detection tasks,” in Frontiers in Optics.   Optica Publishing Group, 2005, p. FThM2.
  67. J. Greffier, S. Si-Mohamed, D. Dabli, H. de Forges, A. Hamard, P. Douek, J. Beregi, and J. Frandon, “Performance of four dual-energy ct platforms for abdominal imaging: a task-based image quality assessment based on phantom data,” European Radiology, vol. 31, pp. 5324–5334, 2021.
  68. J.-P. Dillenseger, C.-I. Gros, A. Sayeh, J. Rasamimanana, F. Lawniczak, J.-M. Leminor, J.-F. Matern, A. Constantinesco, F. Bornert, and P. Choquet, “Image quality evaluation of small fov and large fov cbct devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology,” Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, vol. 46, no. 1, p. 20160285, 2017.
  69. L. Yu, S. Leng, L. Chen, J. M. Kofler, R. E. Carter, and C. H. McCollough, “Prediction of human observer performance in a 2-alternative forced choice low-contrast detection task using channelized hotelling observer: Impact of radiation dose and reconstruction algorithms,” Medical physics, vol. 40, no. 4, p. 041908, 2013.
  70. J. Leipsic, T. M. Labounty, B. Heilbron, J. K. Min, G. J. Mancini, F. Y. Lin, C. Taylor, A. Dunning, and J. P. Earls, “Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: assessment of image noise and image quality in coronary ct angiography,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 195, no. 3, pp. 649–654, 2010.
  71. S. Richard, D. B. Husarik, G. Yadava, S. N. Murphy, and E. Samei, “Towards task-based assessment of ct performance: system and object mtf across different reconstruction algorithms,” Medical physics, vol. 39, no. 7Part1, pp. 4115–4122, 2012.
  72. S. Wilby, A. Palmer, W. Polak, and A. Bucchi, “A review of brachytherapy physical phantoms developed over the last 20 years: clinical purpose and future requirements,” Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 101–115, 2021.
  73. V. Filippou and C. Tsoumpas, “Recent advances on the development of phantoms using 3d printing for imaging with ct, mri, pet, spect, and ultrasound,” Medical physics, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. e740–e760, 2018.
  74. J. Greffier, A. Hamard, F. Pereira, C. Barrau, H. Pasquier, J. P. Beregi, and J. Frandon, “Image quality and dose reduction opportunity of deep learning image reconstruction algorithm for ct: a phantom study,” European radiology, vol. 30, pp. 3951–3959, 2020.
  75. R. Singh, S. R. Digumarthy, V. V. Muse, A. R. Kambadakone, M. A. Blake, A. Tabari, Y. Hoi, N. Akino, E. Angel, R. Madan et al., “Image quality and lesion detection on deep learning reconstruction and iterative reconstruction of submillisievert chest and abdominal ct,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 214, no. 3, pp. 566–573, 2020.
  76. M. Akagi, Y. Nakamura, T. Higaki, K. Narita, Y. Honda, J. Zhou, Z. Yu, N. Akino, and K. Awai, “Deep learning reconstruction improves image quality of abdominal ultra-high-resolution ct,” European radiology, vol. 29, pp. 6163–6171, 2019.
  77. C. T. Jensen, X. Liu, E. P. Tamm, A. G. Chandler, J. Sun, A. C. Morani, S. Javadi, and N. A. Wagner-Bartak, “Image quality assessment of abdominal ct by use of new deep learning image reconstruction: initial experience,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 215, no. 1, pp. 50–57, 2020.
  78. E. Samei and S. Richard, “Assessment of the dose reduction potential of a model-based iterative reconstruction algorithm using a task-based performance metrology,” Medical physics, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 314–323, 2015.
  79. T. Flohr, M. Petersilka, A. Henning, S. Ulzheimer, J. Ferda, and B. Schmidt, “Photon-counting ct review,” Physica Medica, vol. 79, pp. 126–136, 2020.
  80. M. J. Willemink, M. Persson, A. Pourmorteza, N. J. Pelc, and D. Fleischmann, “Photon-counting ct: technical principles and clinical prospects,” Radiology, vol. 289, no. 2, pp. 293–312, 2018.
  81. S. Leng, M. Bruesewitz, S. Tao, K. Rajendran, A. F. Halaweish, N. G. Campeau, J. G. Fletcher, and C. H. McCollough, “Photon-counting detector ct: system design and clinical applications of an emerging technology,” Radiographics, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 729–743, 2019.
  82. A. Viry, C. Aberle, D. Racine, J.-F. Knebel, S. T. Schindera, S. Schmidt, F. Becce, and F. R. Verdun, “Effects of various generations of iterative ct reconstruction algorithms on low-contrast detectability as a function of the effective abdominal diameter: a quantitative task-based phantom study,” Physica Medica, vol. 48, pp. 111–118, 2018.
  83. C. H. McCollough, L. Yu, J. M. Kofler, S. Leng, Y. Zhang, Z. Li, and R. E. Carter, “Degradation of ct low-contrast spatial resolution due to the use of iterative reconstruction and reduced dose levels,” Radiology, vol. 276, no. 2, pp. 499–506, 2015.
  84. F. Verdun, D. Racine, J. Ott, M. Tapiovaara, P. Toroi, F. Bochud, W. Veldkamp, A. Schegerer, R. Bouwman, I. H. Giron et al., “Image quality in ct: From physical measurements to model observers,” Physica Medica, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 823–843, 2015.
  85. E. Samei, D. Bakalyar, K. L. Boedeker, S. Brady, J. Fan, S. Leng, K. J. Myers, L. M. Popescu, J. C. Ramirez Giraldo, F. Ranallo et al., “Performance evaluation of computed tomography systems: summary of aapm task group 233,” Medical physics, vol. 46, no. 11, pp. e735–e756, 2019.
  86. H. H. Harun, M. K. A. Karim, N. A. Muhammad, M. M. A. Kechik, M. T. Chew, and Z. A. Talib, “Task-based assessment on various optimization protocols of computed tomography pulmonary angiography examination,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 188, p. 109692, 2021.
  87. J. Greffier, D. Dabli, J. Frandon, A. Hamard, A. Belaouni, P. Akessoul, Y. Fuamba, J. Le Roy, B. Guiu, and J.-P. Beregi, “Comparison of two versions of a deep learning image reconstruction algorithm on ct image quality and dose reduction: A phantom study,” Medical Physics, vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 5743–5755, 2021.
  88. D. C. Benz, G. Benetos, G. Rampidis, E. Von Felten, A. Bakula, A. Sustar, K. Kudura, M. Messerli, T. A. Fuchs, C. Gebhard et al., “Validation of deep-learning image reconstruction for coronary computed tomography angiography: impact on noise, image quality and diagnostic accuracy,” Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 444–451, 2020.
  89. C. T. Jensen, “Commentary on: Image quality evaluation in dual energy ct of the chest, abdomen and pelvis in obese patients with deep learning image reconstruction,” Journal of computer assisted tomography, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 612–613, 2022.
  90. E. Fair, M. Profio, N. Kulkarni, P. S. Laviolette, B. Barnes, S. Bobholz, M. Levenhagen, R. Ausman, M. O. Griffin, P. Duvnjak et al., “Image quality evaluation in dual-energy ct of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis in obese patients with deep learning image reconstruction,” Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 604–611, 2022.
  91. W. Li, Y. You, S. Zhong, T. Shuai, K. Liao, J. Yu, J. Zhao, Z. Li, and C. Lu, “Image quality assessment of artificial intelligence iterative reconstruction for low dose aortic cta: a feasibility study of 70 kvp and reduced contrast medium volume,” European Journal of Radiology, vol. 149, p. 110221, 2022.
  92. J. Greffier, S. Si-Mohamed, J. Frandon, M. Loisy, F. de Oliveira, J. P. Beregi, and D. Dabli, “Impact of an artificial intelligence deep-learning reconstruction algorithm for ct on image quality and potential dose reduction: A phantom study,” Medical Physics, vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 5052–5063, 2022.
  93. S. Park, J. H. Yoon, I. Joo, M. H. Yu, J. H. Kim, J. Park, S. W. Kim, S. Han, C. Ahn, J. H. Kim et al., “Image quality in liver ct: low-dose deep learning vs standard-dose model-based iterative reconstructions,” European Radiology, pp. 1–10, 2022.
  94. J. Solomon, P. Lyu, D. Marin, and E. Samei, “Noise and spatial resolution properties of a commercially available deep learning-based ct reconstruction algorithm,” Medical physics, vol. 47, no. 9, pp. 3961–3971, 2020.
  95. C. Franck, G. Zhang, P. Deak, and F. Zanca, “Preserving image texture while reducing radiation dose with a deep learning image reconstruction algorithm in chest ct: a phantom study,” Physica Medica, vol. 81, pp. 86–93, 2021.
  96. D. Racine, F. Becce, A. Viry, P. Monnin, B. Thomsen, F. R. Verdun, and D. C. Rotzinger, “Task-based characterization of a deep learning image reconstruction and comparison with filtered back-projection and a partial model-based iterative reconstruction in abdominal ct: a phantom study,” Physica Medica, vol. 76, pp. 28–37, 2020.
  97. J. H. Kim, H. J. Yoon, E. Lee, I. Kim, Y. K. Cha, and S. H. Bak, “Validation of deep-learning image reconstruction for low-dose chest computed tomography scan: emphasis on image quality and noise,” Korean journal of radiology, vol. 22, no. 1, p. 131, 2021.
  98. K. Yang, J. Cao, N. Pisuchpen, A. Kambadakone, R. Gupta, T. Marschall, X. Li, and B. Liu, “Ct image quality evaluation in the age of deep learning: trade-off between functionality and fidelity,” European Radiology, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 2439–2449, 2023.
  99. Y. Nagayama, T. Emoto, Y. Kato, M. Kidoh, S. Oda, D. Sakabe, Y. Funama, T. Nakaura, H. Hayashi, S. Takada et al., “Improving image quality with super-resolution deep-learning-based reconstruction in coronary ct angiography,” European Radiology, vol. 33, no. 12, pp. 8488–8500, 2023.
  100. P. Barca, S. Domenichelli, R. Golfieri, L. Pierotti, L. Spagnoli, S. Tomasi, and L. Strigari, “Image quality evaluation of the precise image ct deep learning reconstruction algorithm compared to filtered back-projection and idose4: a phantom study at different dose levels,” Physica Medica, vol. 106, p. 102517, 2023.
  101. M. A. Mazurowski, “Artificial intelligence may cause a significant disruption to the radiology workforce,” Journal of the American College of Radiology, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 1077–1082, 2019.
  102. D. C. Angus, “Randomized clinical trials of artificial intelligence,” Jama, vol. 323, no. 11, pp. 1043–1045, 2020.
  103. P. P. Ray, “Chatgpt: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope,” Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems, 2023.
  104. A. Saiyeda and M. A. Mir, “Cloud computing for deep learning analytics: A survey of current trends and challenges.” International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, vol. 8, no. 2, 2017.
  105. X.-W. Chen and X. Lin, “Big data deep learning: challenges and perspectives,” IEEE access, vol. 2, pp. 514–525, 2014.
  106. D. Alvarez Melis and T. Jaakkola, “Towards robust interpretability with self-explaining neural networks,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 31, 2018.
  107. Z. C. Lipton, “The mythos of model interpretability: In machine learning, the concept of interpretability is both important and slippery.” Queue, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 31–57, 2018.
  108. Z. Salahuddin, H. C. Woodruff, A. Chatterjee, and P. Lambin, “Transparency of deep neural networks for medical image analysis: A review of interpretability methods,” Computers in biology and medicine, vol. 140, p. 105111, 2022.
  109. N. Bostrom and E. Yudkowsky, “The ethics of artificial intelligence,” in Artificial intelligence safety and security.   Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2018, pp. 57–69.
  110. C. Cath, “Governing artificial intelligence: ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 376, no. 2133, p. 20180080, 2018.
  111. R. Gao, Y. Tang, M. S. Khan, K. Xu, A. B. Paulson, S. Sullivan, Y. Huo, S. Deppen, P. P. Massion, K. L. Sandler et al., “Cancer risk estimation combining lung screening ct with clinical data elements,” Radiology: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 3, no. 6, p. e210032, 2021.

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to Summarize

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up