Abstract
Summation and axial slab reformation (ASR) of thin-section CT dataset are increasingly used to increase productivity against data explosion and to increase the image quality. We hypothesized that the summation or ASR can substitute primary reconstruction (PR) directly from a raw projection data. PR datasets (5-mm section thickness, 20% overlap) were reconstructed in 150 abdominal studies. Summation and ASR datasets of the same image positions and nominal section thickness were calculated from thin-section reconstruction images (2-mm section thickness, 50% overlap). Median root-mean-square error between PR and summation (9.55: 95% CI: 9.51, 9.59) was significantly greater than that between PR and ASR (7.12: 95% CI: 7.08, 7.17) (p < 0.0001). Three radiologists independently analyzed 2,000 pairs of PR and test images (PR [as control], summation, or ASR) to determine if summation or ASR is distinguished from PR. Multireader-multicase ROC analysis showed that Az value was 0.597 (95% CI: 0.552, 0.642) for the discrimination between PR and summation, and 0.574 (95% CI: 0.529, 0.619) for the discrimination between PR and ASR. The difference between these two Az values were not significant (p = 0.41). Radiologists can distinguish between the PR image and the summation or ASR image in abdominal studies, although this discrimination performance is slightly better than would be expected from random guessing. Image fidelity of ASR is higher than that of summation, if PR is regarded as the reference standard.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 47 |
| Pages (from-to) | 436-441 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE |
| Volume | 5749 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 19 Sep 2005 |
| Event | Medical Imaging 2005 - Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment - San Diego, CA, United States Duration: 15 Feb 2005 → 17 Feb 2005 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Computed tomography
- Image quality
- Multiplanar reformation
- Summation
Cite this
}
Summation and axial slab reformation of thin-section abdominal CT : How much are they different from primary reconstruction of a raw projection data? / Lee, Kyoungho; Hong, Helen; Yang, Ji H.; Lee, Kyung Won; Lee, Hak Jong; Kim, Sang H.; Jeong, Dong K.
In: Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 5749, 47, 19.09.2005, p. 436-441.Research output: Contribution to journal › Conference article › Research › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Summation and axial slab reformation of thin-section abdominal CT
T2 - How much are they different from primary reconstruction of a raw projection data?
AU - Lee, Kyoungho
AU - Hong, Helen
AU - Yang, Ji H.
AU - Lee, Kyung Won
AU - Lee, Hak Jong
AU - Kim, Sang H.
AU - Jeong, Dong K.
PY - 2005/9/19
Y1 - 2005/9/19
N2 - Summation and axial slab reformation (ASR) of thin-section CT dataset are increasingly used to increase productivity against data explosion and to increase the image quality. We hypothesized that the summation or ASR can substitute primary reconstruction (PR) directly from a raw projection data. PR datasets (5-mm section thickness, 20% overlap) were reconstructed in 150 abdominal studies. Summation and ASR datasets of the same image positions and nominal section thickness were calculated from thin-section reconstruction images (2-mm section thickness, 50% overlap). Median root-mean-square error between PR and summation (9.55: 95% CI: 9.51, 9.59) was significantly greater than that between PR and ASR (7.12: 95% CI: 7.08, 7.17) (p < 0.0001). Three radiologists independently analyzed 2,000 pairs of PR and test images (PR [as control], summation, or ASR) to determine if summation or ASR is distinguished from PR. Multireader-multicase ROC analysis showed that Az value was 0.597 (95% CI: 0.552, 0.642) for the discrimination between PR and summation, and 0.574 (95% CI: 0.529, 0.619) for the discrimination between PR and ASR. The difference between these two Az values were not significant (p = 0.41). Radiologists can distinguish between the PR image and the summation or ASR image in abdominal studies, although this discrimination performance is slightly better than would be expected from random guessing. Image fidelity of ASR is higher than that of summation, if PR is regarded as the reference standard.
AB - Summation and axial slab reformation (ASR) of thin-section CT dataset are increasingly used to increase productivity against data explosion and to increase the image quality. We hypothesized that the summation or ASR can substitute primary reconstruction (PR) directly from a raw projection data. PR datasets (5-mm section thickness, 20% overlap) were reconstructed in 150 abdominal studies. Summation and ASR datasets of the same image positions and nominal section thickness were calculated from thin-section reconstruction images (2-mm section thickness, 50% overlap). Median root-mean-square error between PR and summation (9.55: 95% CI: 9.51, 9.59) was significantly greater than that between PR and ASR (7.12: 95% CI: 7.08, 7.17) (p < 0.0001). Three radiologists independently analyzed 2,000 pairs of PR and test images (PR [as control], summation, or ASR) to determine if summation or ASR is distinguished from PR. Multireader-multicase ROC analysis showed that Az value was 0.597 (95% CI: 0.552, 0.642) for the discrimination between PR and summation, and 0.574 (95% CI: 0.529, 0.619) for the discrimination between PR and ASR. The difference between these two Az values were not significant (p = 0.41). Radiologists can distinguish between the PR image and the summation or ASR image in abdominal studies, although this discrimination performance is slightly better than would be expected from random guessing. Image fidelity of ASR is higher than that of summation, if PR is regarded as the reference standard.
KW - Computed tomography
KW - Image quality
KW - Multiplanar reformation
KW - Summation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=24644443802&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1117/12.593551
DO - 10.1117/12.593551
M3 - Conference article
VL - 5749
SP - 436
EP - 441
JO - Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE
JF - Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE
SN - 1605-7422
M1 - 47
ER -