T2-weighted imaging of rectal cancer using a 3D fast spin echo sequence with and without deep learning reconstruction: A reader study.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Dan Nguyen, Sarah Palmquist, Ken-Pin Hwang, Jingfei Ma, Usama Salem, Jia Sun, Xinzeng Wang, Jong Bum Son, Randy Ernst, Peng Wei, Harmeet Kaur, Nir Stanietzky
{"title":"T2-weighted imaging of rectal cancer using a 3D fast spin echo sequence with and without deep learning reconstruction: A reader study.","authors":"Dan Nguyen, Sarah Palmquist, Ken-Pin Hwang, Jingfei Ma, Usama Salem, Jia Sun, Xinzeng Wang, Jong Bum Son, Randy Ernst, Peng Wei, Harmeet Kaur, Nir Stanietzky","doi":"10.1002/acm2.70031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare image quality and clinical utility of a T2-weighted (T2W) 3-dimensional (3D) fast spin echo (FSE) sequence using deep learning reconstruction (DLR) versus conventional reconstruction for rectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 50 patients with rectal cancer who underwent rectal MRI consecutively between July 7, 2020 and January 20, 2021 using a T2W 3D FSE sequence with DLR and conventional reconstruction. Three radiologists reviewed the two sets of images, scoring overall SNR, motion artifacts, and overall image quality on a 3-point scale and indicating clinical preference for DLR or conventional reconstruction based on those three criteria as well as image characterization of bowel wall layer definition, tumor invasion of muscularis propria, residual disease, fibrosis, nodal margin, and extramural venous invasion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Image quality was rated as moderate or good for both DLR and conventional reconstruction for most cases. DLR was preferred over conventional reconstruction in all of the categories except for bowel wall layer definition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both conventional reconstruction and DLR provide acceptable image quality for T2W 3D FSE imaging of rectal cancer. DLR was clinically preferred over conventional reconstruction in almost all categories.</p>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":" ","pages":"e70031"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70031","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare image quality and clinical utility of a T2-weighted (T2W) 3-dimensional (3D) fast spin echo (FSE) sequence using deep learning reconstruction (DLR) versus conventional reconstruction for rectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Methods: The study included 50 patients with rectal cancer who underwent rectal MRI consecutively between July 7, 2020 and January 20, 2021 using a T2W 3D FSE sequence with DLR and conventional reconstruction. Three radiologists reviewed the two sets of images, scoring overall SNR, motion artifacts, and overall image quality on a 3-point scale and indicating clinical preference for DLR or conventional reconstruction based on those three criteria as well as image characterization of bowel wall layer definition, tumor invasion of muscularis propria, residual disease, fibrosis, nodal margin, and extramural venous invasion.

Results: Image quality was rated as moderate or good for both DLR and conventional reconstruction for most cases. DLR was preferred over conventional reconstruction in all of the categories except for bowel wall layer definition.

Conclusion: Both conventional reconstruction and DLR provide acceptable image quality for T2W 3D FSE imaging of rectal cancer. DLR was clinically preferred over conventional reconstruction in almost all categories.

使用三维快速自旋回波序列进行和不进行深度学习重建的直肠癌t2加权成像:一项读者研究。
目的:比较使用深度学习重建(DLR)和传统重建进行直肠磁共振成像(MRI)的t2加权(T2W)三维(3D)快速自旋回波(FSE)序列的图像质量和临床应用。方法:该研究纳入了50例直肠癌患者,他们在2020年7月7日至2021年1月20日期间连续接受了直肠MRI,使用T2W 3D FSE序列加DLR和常规重建。三位放射科医生审查了两组图像,以3分制对总体信噪比、运动伪影和总体图像质量进行评分,并根据这三个标准以及肠壁层定义、肿瘤侵犯固有肌层、残留疾病、纤维化、淋巴结边缘和外静脉侵犯的图像特征,指示临床倾向于DLR或传统重建。结果:大多数病例DLR和常规重建的图像质量均为中等或良好。除肠壁层定义外,DLR在所有类别中均优于常规重建。结论:传统重建和DLR对直肠癌T2W三维FSE成像质量均可接受。在临床上,DLR在几乎所有类别中都优于传统重建。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
19.00%
发文量
331
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission. JACMP will publish: -Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500. -Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed. -Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references. -Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents. -Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews. -Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics. -Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信