Comparison of a Bayesian Estimation Algorithm and Singular Value Decomposition Algorithms for 80-detector Row CT Perfusion in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
Overview
Affiliations
Purpose: A variety of postprocessing algorithms for CT perfusion are available, with substantial differences in terms of quantitative maps. Although potential advantages of a Bayesian estimation algorithm are suggested, direct comparison with other algorithms in clinical settings remains scarce. We aimed to compare performance of a Bayesian estimation algorithm and singular value decomposition (SVD) algorithms for the assessment of acute ischemic stroke using an 80-detector row CT perfusion.
Methods: CT perfusion data of 36 patients with acute ischemic stroke were analyzed using the Vitrea implemented a standard SVD algorithm, a reformulated SVD algorithm and a Bayesian estimation algorithm. Correlations and statistical differences between affected and contralateral sides of quantitative parameters (cerebral blood volume [CBV], cerebral blood flow [CBF], mean transit time [MTT], time to peak [TTP] and delay) were analyzed. Agreement of the CT perfusion-estimated and the follow-up diffusion-weighted imaging-derived infarct volume were evaluated by nonparametric Passing-Bablok regression analysis.
Results: CBF and MTT of the Bayesian estimation algorithm were substantially different and showed a better correlation with the standard SVD algorithm (ρ = 0.78 and 0.80, p < 0.001) than with the reformulated SVD algorithm (ρ = 0.59 and 0.39, p < 0.001). There is no significant difference in MTT only when using the reformulated SVD algorithm (p = 0.217). Regarding the regression lines, the slope and intercept were nearly ideal with the Bayesian estimation algorithm (y = 2.42 x-6.51; ρ = 0.60, p < 0.001) in comparison with the SVD algorithms.
Conclusions: The Bayesian estimation algorithm can lead to a better performance compared with the SVD algorithms in the assessment of acute ischemic stroke because of better delineation of abnormal perfusion areas and accurate estimation of infarct volume.
Deep learning-based correction for time truncation in cerebral computed tomography perfusion.
Ichikawa S, Ozaki M, Itadani H, Sugimori H, Kondo Y Radiol Phys Technol. 2024; 17(3):666-678.
PMID: 38861134 DOI: 10.1007/s12194-024-00818-6.
Chandrabhatla A, Kuo E, Sokolowski J, Kellogg R, Park M, Mastorakos P J Clin Med. 2023; 12(11).
PMID: 37297949 PMC: 10253618. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12113755.
Suo S, Zhao Z, Zhao H, Zhang J, Zhao B, Xu J Eur Radiol. 2023; 33(8):5687-5697.
PMID: 37022438 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09557-5.
Kawano H, Adachi T, Saito M, Amano T, Gomyo M, Yokoyama K Neurol Sci. 2023; 44(6):2041-2047.
PMID: 36689012 DOI: 10.1007/s10072-023-06627-w.
A Narrative Review on LI-RADS Algorithm in Liver Tumors: Prospects and Pitfalls.
De Muzio F, Grassi F, DellAversana F, Fusco R, Danti G, Flammia F Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(7).
PMID: 35885561 PMC: 9319674. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12071655.