Assessment of Robustness of MRI Radiomic Features in Four Abdominal Organs: Impact of Deep Learning Reconstruction and Segmentation.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Jingyu Zhong, Yue Xing, Yangfan Hu, Xianwei Liu, Shun Dai, Defang Ding, Junjie Lu, Jiarui Yang, Yue Li, Yang Song, Minda Lu, Dominik Nickel, Wenjie Lu, Huan Zhang, Weiwu Yao
{"title":"Assessment of Robustness of MRI Radiomic Features in Four Abdominal Organs: Impact of Deep Learning Reconstruction and Segmentation.","authors":"Jingyu Zhong, Yue Xing, Yangfan Hu, Xianwei Liu, Shun Dai, Defang Ding, Junjie Lu, Jiarui Yang, Yue Li, Yang Song, Minda Lu, Dominik Nickel, Wenjie Lu, Huan Zhang, Weiwu Yao","doi":"10.1002/jmri.70342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The impact of deep learning (DL) reconstruction and segmentation on MRI radiomics stability has not been fully assessed.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the effects of acquisition, reconstruction, and segmentation on the reproducibility and variability of radiomic features in abdominal MRI.</p><p><strong>Study type: </strong>Prospective.</p><p><strong>Population: </strong>37 volunteers (22 men; mean age ± standard deviation, 37.4 ± 11.0 years).</p><p><strong>Field strength/sequence: </strong>3.0-T; axial turbo spin echo T2-weighted image, and fat-suppressed T2-weighted image using a half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin echo technique, each acquired four times with conventional or accelerated techniques, reconstructed with standard or DL algorithms.</p><p><strong>Assessment: </strong>Regions of interest were automatically generated by a DL neural network for liver, spleen, and right and left kidneys, followed by manual correction. We extracted 107 features using PyRadiomics after z-score normalization.</p><p><strong>Statistical tests: </strong>The reproducibility between acquisitions, reconstructions, and segmentations was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). The variability among the four scans was assessed by coefficient of variation (CV) and quartile coefficient of dispersion (QCD). p < 0.05 was considered significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean ICC (0.518-0.608; 0.606-0.681) and CCC (0.515-0.603; 0.601-0.680) values were low for both manual and automatic segmentation regardless of image acquisition and reconstruction, using conventional acquisition with standard reconstruction as reference. The mean ICC (0.535-0.713) and CCC (0.531-0.714) values were low between manual and automatic segmentation, regardless of image acquisition and reconstruction. The median CV (10.0%-17.5%; 8.9%-15.5%) and QCD (5.3%-8.5%; 5.1%-8.3%) values were moderate but still adequate for both manual and automatic segmentation among different scans.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Given the substantial impact of accelerated acquisition and DL reconstruction on the robustness of radiomics features in abdominal MRI, caution should be exercised when utilizing images with different acquisition and reconstruction techniques in radiomics analysis. The automatic segmentation cannot replace manual segmentation due to insufficient robustness of radiomics features.</p><p><strong>Evidence level: </strong>2.</p><p><strong>Technical efficacy: </strong>Stage 1.</p>","PeriodicalId":16140,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.70342","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The impact of deep learning (DL) reconstruction and segmentation on MRI radiomics stability has not been fully assessed.

Purpose: To investigate the effects of acquisition, reconstruction, and segmentation on the reproducibility and variability of radiomic features in abdominal MRI.

Study type: Prospective.

Population: 37 volunteers (22 men; mean age ± standard deviation, 37.4 ± 11.0 years).

Field strength/sequence: 3.0-T; axial turbo spin echo T2-weighted image, and fat-suppressed T2-weighted image using a half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin echo technique, each acquired four times with conventional or accelerated techniques, reconstructed with standard or DL algorithms.

Assessment: Regions of interest were automatically generated by a DL neural network for liver, spleen, and right and left kidneys, followed by manual correction. We extracted 107 features using PyRadiomics after z-score normalization.

Statistical tests: The reproducibility between acquisitions, reconstructions, and segmentations was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). The variability among the four scans was assessed by coefficient of variation (CV) and quartile coefficient of dispersion (QCD). p < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results: The mean ICC (0.518-0.608; 0.606-0.681) and CCC (0.515-0.603; 0.601-0.680) values were low for both manual and automatic segmentation regardless of image acquisition and reconstruction, using conventional acquisition with standard reconstruction as reference. The mean ICC (0.535-0.713) and CCC (0.531-0.714) values were low between manual and automatic segmentation, regardless of image acquisition and reconstruction. The median CV (10.0%-17.5%; 8.9%-15.5%) and QCD (5.3%-8.5%; 5.1%-8.3%) values were moderate but still adequate for both manual and automatic segmentation among different scans.

Conclusion: Given the substantial impact of accelerated acquisition and DL reconstruction on the robustness of radiomics features in abdominal MRI, caution should be exercised when utilizing images with different acquisition and reconstruction techniques in radiomics analysis. The automatic segmentation cannot replace manual segmentation due to insufficient robustness of radiomics features.

Evidence level: 2.

Technical efficacy: Stage 1.

四个腹部器官MRI放射特征的鲁棒性评估:深度学习重建和分割的影响。
背景:深度学习(DL)重建和分割对MRI放射组学稳定性的影响尚未得到充分评估。目的:探讨获取、重建和分割对腹部MRI放射学特征再现性和变异性的影响。研究类型:前瞻性。人群:37名志愿者(男性22名,平均年龄±标准差,37.4±11.0岁)。场强/序列:3.0-T;轴向涡轮自旋回波t2加权图像,以及使用半傅立叶采集单次涡轮自旋回波技术的脂肪抑制t2加权图像,每个图像使用常规或加速技术获得四次,使用标准或DL算法重建。评估:通过DL神经网络自动生成肝、脾、左右肾的感兴趣区域,然后进行手动校正。在z-score归一化后,我们使用PyRadiomics提取了107个特征。统计检验:使用类内相关系数(ICC)和一致性相关系数(CCC)评估采集、重建和分割之间的可重复性。通过变异系数(CV)和四分位数离散系数(QCD)评估四次扫描的可变性。p结果:以常规采集和标准重建为参照,无论图像采集和重建,手工分割和自动分割的ICC平均值(0.518-0.608;0.606-0.681)和CCC平均值(0.515-0.603;0.601-0.680)都较低。无论图像采集和重建,手工分割和自动分割的ICC平均值(0.535-0.713)和CCC平均值(0.531-0.714)都较低。中位CV(10.0% ~ 17.5%; 8.9% ~ 15.5%)和QCD(5.3% ~ 8.5%; 5.1% ~ 8.3%)值适中,但对于不同扫描之间的手动和自动分割仍然足够。结论:考虑到加速采集和DL重建对腹部MRI放射组学特征的鲁棒性的重大影响,在放射组学分析中使用不同采集和重建技术的图像时应谨慎。由于放射组学特征的鲁棒性不足,自动分割不能代替人工分割。证据等级:2。技术功效:第一阶段。
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
9.70
自引率
6.80%
发文量
494
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (JMRI) is an international journal devoted to the timely publication of basic and clinical research, educational and review articles, and other information related to the diagnostic applications of magnetic resonance.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书