Inoue, Akitoshi

AbstractPurposeEye‐tracking approaches have been used to understand the visual search process in radiology. However, previous eye‐tracking work in computer tomography (CT) has been limited largely to single cross‐sectional images or video playback of the reconstructed volume, which do not accurately reflect radiologists' visual search activities and their interactivity with three‐dimensional image data at a computer workstation (e.g., scroll, pan, and zoom) for visual evaluation of diagnostic imaging targets. We have developed a platform that integrates eye‐tracking hardware with in‐house‐developed reader workstation software to allow monitoring of the visual search process and reader‐image interactions in clinically relevant reader tasks. The purpose of this work is to validate the spatial accuracy of eye‐tracking data using this platform for different eye‐tracking data acquisition modes.MethodsAn eye‐tracker was integrated with a previously developed workstation designed for reader performance studies. The integrated system captured real‐time eye movement and workstation events at 1000 Hz sampling frequency. The eye‐tracker was operated either in head‐stabilized mode or in free‐movement mode. In head‐stabilized mode, the reader positioned their head on a manufacturer‐provided chinrest. In free‐movement mode, a biofeedback tool emitted an audio cue when the head position was outside the data collection range (general biofeedback) or outside a narrower range of positions near the calibration position (strict biofeedback). Four radiologists and one resident were invited to participate in three studies to determine eye‐tracking spatial accuracy under three constraint conditions: head‐stabilized mode (i.e., with use of a chin rest), free movement with general biofeedback, and free movement with strict biofeedback. Study 1 evaluated the impact of head stabilization versus general or strict biofeedback using a cross‐hair target prior to the integration of the eye‐tracker with the image viewing workstation. In Study 2, after integration of the eye‐tracker and reader workstation, readers were asked to fixate on targets that were randomly distributed within a volumetric digital phantom. In Study 3, readers used the integrated system to scroll through volumetric patient CT angiographic images while fixating on the centerline of designated blood vessels (from the left coronary artery to dorsalis pedis artery). Spatial accuracy was quantified as the offset between the center of the intended target and the detected fixation using units of image pixels and the degree of visual angle.ResultsThe three head position constraint conditions yielded comparable accuracy in the studies using digital phantoms. For Study 1 involving the digital crosshairs, the median ± the standard deviation of offset values among readers were 15.2 ± 7.0 image pixels with the chinrest, 14.2 ± 3.6 image pixels with strict biofeedback, and 19.1 ± 6.5 image pixels with general biofeedback. For Study 2 using the random dot phantom, the median ± standard deviation offset values were 16.7 ± 28.8 pixels with use of a chinrest, 16.5 ± 24.6 pixels using strict biofeedback, and 18.0 ± 22.4 pixels using general biofeedback, which translated to a visual angle of about 0.8° for all three conditions. We found no obvious association between eye‐tracking accuracy and target size or view time. In Study 3 viewing patient images, use of the chinrest and strict biofeedback demonstrated comparable accuracy, while the use of general biofeedback demonstrated a slightly worse accuracy. The median ± standard deviation of offset values were 14.8 ± 11.4 pixels with use of a chinrest, 21.0 ± 16.2 pixels using strict biofeedback, and 29.7 ± 20.9 image pixels using general biofeedback. These corresponded to visual angles ranging from 0.7° to 1.3°.ConclusionsAn integrated eye‐tracker system to assess reader eye movement and interactive viewing in relation to imaging targets demonstrated reasonable spatial accuracy for assessment of visual fixation. The head‐free movement condition with audio biofeedback performed similarly to head‐stabilized mode.

Background Due to their easy accessibility, CT scans have been increasingly used for investigation of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Purpose To estimate the performance of a dual-phase, dual-energy (DE) GI bleed CT protocol in patients with overt GI bleeding in clinical practice and examine the added value of portal phase and DE images. Materials and Methods Consecutive patients with GI bleeding underwent a two-phase DE GI bleed CT protocol. Two gastroenterologists established the reference standard. Performance was estimated using clinical CT reports. Three GI radiologists rated confidence in GI bleeding in a subset of 62 examinations, evaluating first mixed kV arterial images, then after examining additional portal venous phase images, and finally after additional DE images (virtual non-contrast and virtual monoenergetic 50 keV images). Results 52 of 176 patients (29.5%) had GI bleeding by the reference standard. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the CT GI bleed protocol for detecting GI bleeding were 65.4%, 89.5%, 72.3%, and 86.0%, respectively. In patients with GI bleeding, diagnostic confidence of readers increased after adding portal phase images to arterial phase images ( p = 0.002), without additional benefit from dual energy images. In patients without GI bleeding, confidence in luminal extravasation appropriately decreased after adding portal phase, and subsequently DE images ( p = 0.006, p = 0.018). Conclusion A two-phase DE GI bleed CT protocol had high specificity and negative predictive value in clinical practice. Portal venous phase images improved diagnostic confidence in comparison to arterial phase images alone. Dual-energy images further improved radiologist confidence in the absence of bleeding.

Objective This study aims to determine if low iodine dynamic computed tomography angiography performed after a fixed delay or test bolus acquisition demonstrates high concordance with clinical computed tomography angiography (using a routine amount of iodinated contrast) to display lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. Methods After informed consent, low iodine dynamic computed tomography angiography examination (using either a fixed delay or test bolus) using 50 ml of iodine contrast media was performed. A subsequent clinical computed tomography angiography using standard iodine dose (115 or 145 ml) served as the reference standard. A vascular radiologist reviewed dynamic and clinical computed tomography angiography images to categorize the lumen into “not opacified”, “<50% stenosis”, “ 50 ̶70% stenosis”, “>70% stenosis”, and “occluded” for seven arterial segments in each lower extremity. Concordance between low iodine dynamic computed tomography angiography and the routine iodine reference standard was calculated. The clinical utility of 4D volume-rendered images was also evaluated. Results Sixty-eight patients (average age 66.1 ± 12.3 years, male; female = 49: 19) were enrolled, with 34 patients each undergoing low iodine dynamic computed tomography angiography using fixed delay and test bolus techniques, respectively. One patient assigned to the test bolus group did not undergo low iodine computed tomography angiography due to unavailable delayed time. The fixed delay was 13 s, with test bolus acquisition resulting in a mean variable delay prior to image acquisition of 19.5 s (range; 8–32 s). Run-off to the ankle was observed using low iodine dynamic computed tomography angiography following fixed delay and test bolus acquisition in 76.4% (26/34) and 100% (33/33) of patients, respectively ( p = 0.005). Considering extremities with run-off to the ankle and without severe artifact, the concordance rate between low iodine dynamic computed tomography angiography and the routine iodine reference standard was 86.8% (310/357) using fixed delay and 97.9% (425/434) using test bolus ( p < 0.001). 4D volume-rendered images using fixed delay and test bolus demonstrated asymmetric flow in 57.7% (15/26) and 58.1% (18/31) ( p = 0.978) of patients, and collateral blood flow in 11.5% (3/26) and 22.6% (7/31) of patients ( p = 0.319), respectively. Conclusion Low iodine dynamic computed tomography angiography with test bolus acquisition has a high concordance with routine peripheral computed tomography angiography performed with standard iodine dose, resulting in improved run-off to the ankle compared to dynamic computed tomography angiography performed after a fixed delay. This method is useful for minimizing iodine dose in patients at risk for contrast-induced nephropathy. 4D volume-rendered computed tomography angiography images provide useful dynamic information.