不同扫描参数下CT主观及客观分辨率的重测信度研究

      Test-Retest Reliability Assessment of Computed Tomography Subjective and Objective Resolution under Differentiated Scanning Parameters

      • 摘要:
        目的 基于现有的CT性能检测方法,在不同扫描条件下分别对空间分辨率和密度分辨率的主观检测结果和客观检测结果的重测信度进行评价和分析。
        方法 采用前瞻性研究方法,基于临床上头部、胸部和腹部的常规扫描协议,对8台处于不同区域的CT设备进行前后两轮检测,每轮检测重复3次。首先采用变异系数(coefficient of variation,CV)和组内相关系数(intraclass correlation coefficient,ICC)评价不同设备之间的重测信度,然后利用Bland-Altman分析评价单台设备前后两轮的重测信度。
        结果 不同设备之间,头部扫描空间分辨率的CV为8.85%~21.66%,ICC为0.26~0.72;密度分辨率的CV为5.53%~47.84%,ICC为0.16~0.75。胸部扫描空间分辨率的CV为9.13%~19.65%,ICC为0.41~0.75;密度分辨率的CV为12.25%~38.89%,ICC为0.18~0.68。腹部扫描密度分辨率的CV为5.91%~37.33%,ICC为0.23~0.77。对于同一台设备,当增强等级为1级时,头部主观空间分辨率两轮检测结果之间的差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。当增强等级为1级、2级和3级时,胸部客观空间分辨率两轮检测结果之间的差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。在其余扫描条件下,两轮检测结果之间的差异无统计学意义。
        结论 在大部分扫描条件下,采用客观对比度评价不同CT检测结果之间的差异性和一致性优于采用主观评价方法。对于同一台设备,即使采用相同强度的重建迭代算法,前后两轮头部和胸部空间分辨率的检测结果也可能存在显著差异,在进行客观空间分辨率检测时需要关注结果的一致性。

         

        Abstract: Purpose Based on existing CT performance testing methods, the test-retest reliability of subjective and objective results for both spatial resolution and low-contrast detectability was evaluated and analyzed under different scanning conditions. Methods A prospective research method was adopted, using clinical routine scanning protocols and parameters for the head, chest and abdomen. Eight CT scanners from different regions underwent two rounds of test, with each round tested three times. The coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to evaluate inter-CT test-retest reliability. Bland-Altman analysis was used to evaluate intra-CT test-retest reliability. Results For head scans, the CV range for spatial resolution was 8.85%~21.66%, with ICCs from 0.26 to 0.72; the CV range for low-contrast detectability was 5.53%~47.84%, with ICCs from 0.16 to 0.75. For chest scans, the CV range for spatial resolution was 9.13%~19.65%, with ICCs from 0.41 to 0.75; the CV range for low-contrast detectability was 12.25%~38.89%, with ICCs from 0.18 to 0.68. For abdomen scans, the CV range for low-contrast detectability was 5.91%~37.33%, with ICCs from 0.23 to 0.77. For the same CT, the successive results of subjective spatial resolution from head protocols demonstrated statistical significance under the first enhancement strength. Moreover, the successive results of objective spatial resolution from chest protocols demonstrated statistical significance under the first, second and third enhancement level. No statistical significance was observed under other scanning conditions. Conclusion The objective contrast evaluation method demonstrated better variability and consistency compared to the subjective evaluation method under most test conditions. Even for the same CT with iterative reconstruction algorithm at the same level, there may exist statistical significance of the spatial resolution values from successive head and chest scanning. Cautions should be taken when test results of objective spatial resolution are analyzed.

         

      /

      返回文章
      返回