ISSN 1004-4140
CN 11-3017/P
程晓悦, 吴晓华, 郝优, 等. CT窗口设置对人工智能分类肺部病变结果的影响[J]. CT理论与应用研究, 2023, 32(4): 515-522. DOI: 10.15953/j.ctta.2022.210.
引用本文: 程晓悦, 吴晓华, 郝优, 等. CT窗口设置对人工智能分类肺部病变结果的影响[J]. CT理论与应用研究, 2023, 32(4): 515-522. DOI: 10.15953/j.ctta.2022.210.
CHENG X Y, WU X H, HAO Y, et al. Effect of Computed Tomography Window Technique on the Results of Artificial Intelligence Classification of Lung Lesions[J]. CT Theory and Applications, 2023, 32(4): 515-522. DOI: 10.15953/j.ctta.2022.210. (in Chinese).
Citation: CHENG X Y, WU X H, HAO Y, et al. Effect of Computed Tomography Window Technique on the Results of Artificial Intelligence Classification of Lung Lesions[J]. CT Theory and Applications, 2023, 32(4): 515-522. DOI: 10.15953/j.ctta.2022.210. (in Chinese).

CT窗口设置对人工智能分类肺部病变结果的影响

Effect of Computed Tomography Window Technique on the Results of Artificial Intelligence Classification of Lung Lesions

  • 摘要: 目的:应用3种不同的3D CNN的算法及5种CT窗口设置,探讨CT窗技术对人工智能分类肺部病变结果的影响。方法:回顾性分析172例周围型肺癌及185例局灶性肺炎的胸部CT影像资料,选择ResNet、ResNext以及DenseNet 3种不同的3D CNN的算法将病变分为两组,并在每1种3D CNN算法处理过程中应用5种不同的CT窗口设置,包括肺窗(1500,-600),纵隔窗(350,40),自定义窗口1(SW1)(1000,40),自定义窗口2(SW2)(1000,-100),全窗(4096,1024),分别计算分类准确率及AUC结果,并进行ROC曲线的两两对比。结果:ResNet的平均分类准确率最低为纵隔窗85.732%,AUC值为0.871;平均分类准确率最高为全窗,达91.596%,AUC值为0.946。ResNext的平均分类准确率最低为纵隔窗81.528%,AUC值为0.814;平均分类准确率最高为全窗,达86.568%,AUC值为0.882。DenseNet的平均分类准确率最低为纵隔窗87.954%,AUC值为0.906;平均分类准确率最高为SW2,达93.274%,AUC值为0.951。应用medcalc将3种3D CNN的5种窗口下的ROC曲线进行了两两对比发现,纵隔窗与肺窗、纵隔窗与SW1、纵隔窗与SW2之间的AUC值比较均有统计学意义。结论:3种3D CNN的分类诊断效能差别不大;CT窗口设置对CNN分类肺部病变结果有影响,在纵隔窗设置下以上3种人工智能算法对该两类肺部病变的诊断效能最差。

     

    Abstract: Objective: To use three different 3D CNN algorithms and five different computed tomography (CT) window settings to study the effect on the results of artificial intelligence classification of lung lesions in different CT window techniques. Method: A total of 172 cases of peripheral lung cancer and 185 of focal pneumonia who underwent chest CT were analyzed. Three different 3D CNN algorithms were selected (ResNet, ResNext, and DenseNet) to divide the lesions into two groups. Five different CT window settings, including lung window (1500, 600), mediastinal window (350, 40), custom window 1 (SW1) (1000, 40), and custom window 2 (SW2) (1000, 100), were used retrospectively. We calculated classification accuracy, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and area under the curve (AUC). The ROC curve was compared in pairs. Results: The average classification accuracy of ResNet was the lowest in the mediastinal window (85.732%; AUC value: 0.871) and the highest in the full window (91.596%; AUC value: 0.946). The average classification accuracy of ResNext was the lowest in the mediastinal window (81.528%; AUC value: 0.814) and the highest in the full window (86.568%; AUC value: 0.882). The average classification accuracy of DenseNet was the lowest in the mediastinal window (87.954%; AUC value: 0.906) and the highest in the SW2 window (93.274%; AUC value: 0.951). Medcalc was used to compare ROC curves under five windows of three 3D CNN. The AUC values between mediastinal window and lung window, mediastinal window and SW1, and mediastinal window and SW2 were statistically significant. Conclusion: There is little difference in the diagnostic efficacy of the three 3D CNN. Different CT window settings have an influence on the results of CNN classification of the lung lesions, and the diagnostic efficiency of the three 3D CNN is the worst under the mediastinal window.

     

/

返回文章
返回