Inter-observer agreement and image quality of model-based algorithm applied to the Coronary Artery Disease-Reporting and Data System score

Insights into Imaging

Table 3 Comparison between MBIR and IR for HU, SD (noise), CNR and SNR. Comparisons were computed using t-Student’s test

Vessel	HU (± SD)			SD (± SD)			CNR (± SD)			SNR (± SD)
Vessel	MBIR	IR	p-value	MBIR	IR	p-value	MBIR	IR	p-value	MBIR	IR	p-value
RCA	500 ± 123	474 ± 126	< 0.0001	19 ± 6	26 ± 7	< 0.0001	28 ± 13	18 ± 8	< 0.0001	27 ± 20	13 ± 6	< 0.0001
CTk	477 ± 119	466 ± 131	0.032	25 ± 8	29 ± 10	< 0.0001	26 ± 12	18 ± 8	< 0.0001	24 ± 11	12 ± 6	< 0.0001
LAD	506 ± 119	489 ± 132	0.034	18 ± 8	27 ± 9	< 0.0001	29 ± 13	19 ± 9	< 0.0001	29 ± 18	13 ± 9	< 0.0001
LCx	505 ± 119	490 ± 143	0.122	18 ± 7	26 ± 9	< 0.0001	28 ± 14	19 ± 8	< 0.0001	25 ± 13	13 ± 7	< 0.0001
AO	480 ± 113	481 ± 121	0.445	25 ± 8	30 ± 11	0.110	27 ± 12	18 ± 8	< 0.0001	28 ± 14	13 ± 7	< 0.0001

HU Hounsfield Unit, CNR contrast-to-noise ratio, SNR signal-to-noise ratio, RCA right coronary artery, CTk common trunk, LAD left anterior descending artery, LCx left circumflex artery, AO aorta, MBIR model-based iterative reconstruction, IR iterative reconstruction
p-values in bold represent statistical significant differences