Automated quantification and evaluation of motion artifact on coronary CT angiography images. Issue 12 (13th November 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ma, Hongfeng; Gros, Eric; Baginski, Scott G.; Laste, Zachary R.; Kulkarni, Naveen M.; Okerlund, Darin; Schmidt, Taly G.
• Is Part Of: Medical physics. Volume 45:Issue 12(2018)
• Page Start: 5494
• Page End: 5508
• Publication Date: 2018-11-13
• Subjects: cardiac imaging -- CCTA -- motion artifact evaluation -- motion artifact quantification; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Medical physics; Geneeskunde; Natuurkunde; Toepassingen; Biophysics; Periodicals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/mp.13243
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0094-2405

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: This study developed and validated a Motion Artifact Quantification algorithm to automatically quantify the severity of motion artifacts on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) images. The algorithm was then used to develop a Motion IQ Decision method to automatically identify whether a CCTA dataset is of sufficient diagnostic image quality or requires further correction. Method: The developed Motion Artifact Quantification algorithm includes steps to identify the right coronary artery (RCA) regions of interest (ROIs), segment vessel and shading artifacts, and to calculate the motion artifact score (MAS) metric. The segmentation algorithms were verified against ground‐truth manual segmentations. The segmentation algorithms were also verified by comparing and analyzing the MAS calculated from ground‐truth segmentations and the algorithm‐generated segmentations. The Motion IQ Decision algorithm first identifies slices with unsatisfactory image quality using a MAS threshold. The algorithm then uses an artifact‐length threshold to determine whether the degraded vessel segment is large enough to cause the dataset to be nondiagnostic. An observer study on 30 clinical CCTA datasets was performed to obtain the ground‐truth decisions of whether the datasets were of sufficient image quality. A five‐fold cross‐validation was used to identify the thresholds and to evaluate the Motion IQ Decision algorithm. Results: The automated segmentation algorithms in the Motion Artifact Quantification algorithm resulted in Dice coefficients of 0.84 for the segmented vessel regions and 0.75 for the segmented shading artifact regions. The MAS calculated using the automated algorithm was within 10% of the values obtained using ground‐truth segmentations. The MAS threshold and artifact‐length thresholds were determined by the ROC analysis to be 0.6 and 6.25 mm by all folds. The Motion IQ Decision algorithm demonstrated 100% sensitivity, 66.7% ± 27.9% specificity, and a total accuracy of 86.7% ± 12.5% for identifying datasets in which the RCA required correction. The Motion IQ Decision algorithm demonstrated 91.3% sensitivity, 71.4% specificity, and a total accuracy of 86.7% for identifying CCTA datasets that need correction for any of the three main vessels. Conclusion: The Motion Artifact Quantification algorithm calculated accurate (<10% error) motion artifact scores using the automated segmentation methods. The developed algorithms demonstrated high sensitivity (91.3%) and specificity (71.4%) in identifying datasets of insufficient image quality. The developed algorithms for automatically quantifying motion artifact severity may be useful for comparing acquisition techniques, improving best‐phase selection algorithms, and evaluating motion compensation techniques.