Meghana Urs, Aditya Killekar, Valerie Builoff, Mark Lemley, Chih-Chun Wei, Giselle Ramirez, Paul Kavanagh, Christopher Buckley, Piotr J Slomka
{"title":"Dynamic frame-by-frame motion correction for <sup>18</sup>F-flurpiridaz PET-MPI using convolution neural network.","authors":"Meghana Urs, Aditya Killekar, Valerie Builoff, Mark Lemley, Chih-Chun Wei, Giselle Ramirez, Paul Kavanagh, Christopher Buckley, Piotr J Slomka","doi":"10.1101/2025.06.27.25330436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Precise quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) and flow reserve (MFR) in <sup>18</sup>F-flurpiridaz PET significantly relies on motion correction (MC). However, the manual frame-by-frame correction leads to significant inter-observer variability, time-consuming, and requires significant experience. We propose a deep learning (DL) framework for automatic MC of <sup>18</sup>F-flurpiridaz PET.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The method employs a 3D ResNet based architecture that takes 3D PET volumes and outputs motion vectors. It was validated using 5-fold cross-validation on data from 32 sites of a Phase III clinical trial (NCT01347710). Manual corrections from two experienced operators served as ground truth, and data augmentation using simulated vectors enhanced training robustness. The study compared the DL approach to both manual and standard non-AI automatic MC methods, assessing agreement and diagnostic accuracy using minimal segmental MBF and MFR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) for significant CAD were comparable between DL-MC MBF, manual-MC MBF from Operators (AUC=0.897, 0.892 and 0.889, respectively; p>0.05), standard non-AI automatic MC (AUC=0.877; p>0.05) and significantly higher than No-MC (AUC=0.835; p<0.05). Similar findings were observed with MFR. The 95% confidence limits for agreement with the operator were ±0.49ml/g/min (mean difference = 0.00) for MFR and ±0.24ml/g/min (mean difference = 0.00) for MBF.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DL-MC is significantly faster but diagnostically comparable to manual-MC. The quantitative results obtained with DL-MC for MBF and MFR are in excellent agreement with those manually corrected by experienced operators compared to standard non-AI automatic MC in patients undergoing <sup>18</sup>F-flurpiridaz PET-MPI.</p>","PeriodicalId":94281,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12236872/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.06.27.25330436","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Precise quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) and flow reserve (MFR) in 18F-flurpiridaz PET significantly relies on motion correction (MC). However, the manual frame-by-frame correction leads to significant inter-observer variability, time-consuming, and requires significant experience. We propose a deep learning (DL) framework for automatic MC of 18F-flurpiridaz PET.
Methods: The method employs a 3D ResNet based architecture that takes 3D PET volumes and outputs motion vectors. It was validated using 5-fold cross-validation on data from 32 sites of a Phase III clinical trial (NCT01347710). Manual corrections from two experienced operators served as ground truth, and data augmentation using simulated vectors enhanced training robustness. The study compared the DL approach to both manual and standard non-AI automatic MC methods, assessing agreement and diagnostic accuracy using minimal segmental MBF and MFR.
Results: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) for significant CAD were comparable between DL-MC MBF, manual-MC MBF from Operators (AUC=0.897, 0.892 and 0.889, respectively; p>0.05), standard non-AI automatic MC (AUC=0.877; p>0.05) and significantly higher than No-MC (AUC=0.835; p<0.05). Similar findings were observed with MFR. The 95% confidence limits for agreement with the operator were ±0.49ml/g/min (mean difference = 0.00) for MFR and ±0.24ml/g/min (mean difference = 0.00) for MBF.
Conclusion: DL-MC is significantly faster but diagnostically comparable to manual-MC. The quantitative results obtained with DL-MC for MBF and MFR are in excellent agreement with those manually corrected by experienced operators compared to standard non-AI automatic MC in patients undergoing 18F-flurpiridaz PET-MPI.