A comparison between manual and artificial intelligence–based automatic positioning in CT imaging for COVID-19 patients.

Objective: To analyze and compare the imaging workflow, radiation dose, and image quality for COVID-19 patients examined using either the conventional manual positioning (MP) method or an AI-based automatic positioning (AP) method. Materials and methods: One hundred twenty-seven adult COVID-19 patients underwent chest CT scans on a CT scanner using the same scan protocol except with the manual positioning (MP group) for the initial scan and an AI-based automatic positioning method (AP group) for the follow-up scan. Radiation dose, patient positioning time, and off-center distance of the two groups were recorded and compared. Image noise and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were assessed by three experienced radiologists and were compared between the two groups. Results: The AP operation was successful for all patients in the AP group and reduced the total positioning time by 28% compared with the MP group. Compared with the MP group, the AP group had significantly less patient off-center distance (AP 1.56 cm ± 0.83 vs. MP 4.05 cm ± 2.40, p < 0.001) and higher proportion of positioning accuracy (AP 99% vs. MP 92%), resulting in 16% radiation dose reduction (AP 6.1 mSv ± 1.3 vs. MP 7.3 mSv ± 1.2, p < 0.001) and 9% image noise reduction in erector spinae and lower noise and higher SNR for lesions in the pulmonary peripheral areas. Conclusion: The AI-based automatic positioning and centering in CT imaging is a promising new technique for reducing radiation dose and optimizing imaging workflow and image quality in imaging the chest. Key Points: • The AI-based automatic positioning (AP) operation was successful for all patients in our study. • AP method reduced the total positioning time by 28% compared with the manual positioning (MP). • AP method had less patient off-center distance and higher proportion of positioning accuracy than MP method, resulting in 16% radiation dose reduction and 9% image noise reduction in erector spinae. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]