Comparison of computer-aided detection (CADe) capability for pulmonary nodules among standard-, reduced- and ultra-low-dose CTs with and without hybrid type iterative reconstruction technique

Abstract

PurposeTo directly compare the effect of a reconstruction algorithm on nodule detection capability of the computer-aided detection (CADe) system using standard-dose, reduced-dose and ultra-low dose chest CTs with and without adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D (AIDR 3D). Materials and methodsOur institutional review board approved this study, and written informed consent was obtained from each patient. Standard-, reduced- and ultra-low-dose chest CTs (250 mA, 50 mA and 10 mA) were used to examine 40 patients, 21 males (mean age ± standard deviation: 63.1 ± 11.0 years) and 19 females (mean age, 65.1 ± 12.7 years), and reconstructed as 1 mm-thick sections. Detection of nodule equal to more than 4 mm in dimeter was automatically performed by our proprietary CADe software. The utility of iterative reconstruction method for improving nodule detection capability, sensitivity and false positive rate (/case) of the CADe system using all protocols were compared by means of McNemar’s test or signed rank test. ResultsSensitivity (SE: 0.43) and false-positive rate (FPR: 7.88) of ultra-low-dose CT without AIDR 3D was significantly inferior to those of standard-dose CTs (with AIDR 3D: SE, 0.78, p < .0001, FPR, 3.05, p < .0001; and without AIDR 3D: SE, 0.80, p < .0001, FPR: 2.63, p < .0001), reduced-dose CTs (with AIDR 3D: SE, 0.81, p < .0001, FPR, 3.05, p < .0001; and without AIDR 3D: SE, 0.62, p < .0001, FPR: 2.95, p < .0001) and ultra-low-dose CT with AIDR 3D (SE, 0.79, p < .0001, FPR, 4.88, p = .0001). ConclusionThe AIDR 3D has a significant positive effect on nodule detection capability of the CADe system even when radiation dose is reduced.