Comparison of three image comparison methods for the visual assessment of the image fidelity of compressed computed tomography images

作者：Kim Bohyoung^*; Lee Hyunna; Kim Kil Joong; Seo Jinwook; Park Seongjin; Shin Yeong Gil; Kim Soo Hong; Lee Kyoung Ho

来源：Medical Physics, 2011, 38(2): 836-844.

DOI：10.1118/1.3538925

Purpose: This study aimed to comparatively evaluate three different image comparison methods: alternate display without an intervening blank image (AWOB), alternate display with an intervening blank image (AWB), and side-by-side display (SSD), in terms of the perceptual sensitivity to image differences between Joint Photographic Experts Group 2000 (JPEG2000) compressed body CT images and their originals.
Methods: A total of 50 body CT images obtained with five different scan protocols (5-mm-thick abdomen, 0.67-mm-thick abdomen, 5-mm-thick lung, 0.67-mm-thick lung, and 5-mm-thick low-dose lung) were compressed to one of five compression ratios (reversible, 6:1, 8:1, 10:1, and 15:1) using JPEG2000 algorithm. The fidelity of the compressed images was visually assessed on a four-grade scale independently by five radiologists using each of the three image comparison methods of AWOB, AWB, and SSD. The fidelity grading results for the 40 irreversibly compressed images were compared between the three image comparison methods using the Friedman tests with post hoc Tukey tests. The number of image pairs with no perceptible difference was compared using the exact tests for paired proportions. The time required for the fidelity assessment for all of the 50 compressed images was also compared using the Friedman tests with post hoc Tukey tests.
Results: For the 40 irreversibly compressed images, the fidelity grade was significantly lower for AWOB than for AWB or SSD (p < 0.01 for all readers); however, there was no significant difference between AWB and SSD (p-value range, 0.06-0.92). The percentage of image pairs with no perceptible difference tended to be smaller for AWOB than for AWB (p < 0.01 for all readers) or SSD (p < 0.01 for readers 1-3, p = 0.04 for reader 4, and p = 0.23 for reader 5). However, there was no significant difference between AWB and SSD (p-value range, 0.12-> 0.99). For all of the 50 compressed images, the fidelity grading time significantly increased in the order of AWOB, SSD, and AWB.
Conclusions: In assessing the image fidelity of JPEG2000 compressed body CT images, AWOB yields lower fidelity grade and requires less fidelity grading time than AWB or SSD, indicating that AWOB is most sensitive to image differences among of them.

• 出版日期2011-2