深度学习加速腰椎核磁共振成像的诊断评估。

IF 1.3 Q4 NEUROIMAGING
Neuroradiology Journal Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-09 DOI:10.1177/19714009231224428
Komal M Awan, Augusto Lio M Goncalves Filho, Azadeh Tabari, Brooks P Applewhite, Min Lang, Wei-Ching Lo, Robert Sellers, Peter Kollasch, Bryan Clifford, Dominik Nickel, Jad Husseni, Otto Rapalino, Pamela Schaefer, Stephen Cauley, Susie Y Huang, John Conklin
{"title":"深度学习加速腰椎核磁共振成像的诊断评估。","authors":"Komal M Awan, Augusto Lio M Goncalves Filho, Azadeh Tabari, Brooks P Applewhite, Min Lang, Wei-Ching Lo, Robert Sellers, Peter Kollasch, Bryan Clifford, Dominik Nickel, Jad Husseni, Otto Rapalino, Pamela Schaefer, Stephen Cauley, Susie Y Huang, John Conklin","doi":"10.1177/19714009231224428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Deep learning (DL) accelerated MR techniques have emerged as a promising approach to accelerate routine MR exams. While prior studies explored DL acceleration for specific lumbar MRI sequences, a gap remains in comprehending the impact of a fully DL-based MRI protocol on scan time and diagnostic quality for routine lumbar spine MRI. To address this, we assessed the image quality and diagnostic performance of a DL-accelerated lumbar spine MRI protocol in comparison to a conventional protocol.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We prospectively evaluated 36 consecutive outpatients undergoing non-contrast enhanced lumbar spine MRIs. Both protocols included sagittal T1, T2, STIR, and axial T2-weighted images. Two blinded neuroradiologists independently reviewed images for foraminal stenosis, spinal canal stenosis, nerve root compression, and facet arthropathy. Grading comparison employed the Wilcoxon signed rank test. For the head-to-head comparison, a 5-point Likert scale to assess image quality, considering artifacts, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), anatomical structure visualization, and overall diagnostic quality. We applied a 15% noninferiority margin to determine whether the DL-accelerated protocol was noninferior.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences existed between protocols when evaluating foraminal and spinal canal stenosis, nerve compression, or facet arthropathy (all <i>p</i> > .05). The DL-spine protocol was noninferior for overall diagnostic quality and visualization of the cord, CSF, intervertebral disc, and nerve roots. However, it exhibited reduced SNR and increased artifact perception. Interobserver reproducibility ranged from moderate to substantial (κ = 0.50-0.76).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study indicates that DL reconstruction in spine imaging effectively reduces acquisition times while maintaining comparable diagnostic quality to conventional MRI.</p>","PeriodicalId":47358,"journal":{"name":"Neuroradiology Journal","volume":" ","pages":"323-331"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11138337/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic evaluation of deep learning accelerated lumbar spine MRI.\",\"authors\":\"Komal M Awan, Augusto Lio M Goncalves Filho, Azadeh Tabari, Brooks P Applewhite, Min Lang, Wei-Ching Lo, Robert Sellers, Peter Kollasch, Bryan Clifford, Dominik Nickel, Jad Husseni, Otto Rapalino, Pamela Schaefer, Stephen Cauley, Susie Y Huang, John Conklin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19714009231224428\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Deep learning (DL) accelerated MR techniques have emerged as a promising approach to accelerate routine MR exams. While prior studies explored DL acceleration for specific lumbar MRI sequences, a gap remains in comprehending the impact of a fully DL-based MRI protocol on scan time and diagnostic quality for routine lumbar spine MRI. To address this, we assessed the image quality and diagnostic performance of a DL-accelerated lumbar spine MRI protocol in comparison to a conventional protocol.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We prospectively evaluated 36 consecutive outpatients undergoing non-contrast enhanced lumbar spine MRIs. Both protocols included sagittal T1, T2, STIR, and axial T2-weighted images. Two blinded neuroradiologists independently reviewed images for foraminal stenosis, spinal canal stenosis, nerve root compression, and facet arthropathy. Grading comparison employed the Wilcoxon signed rank test. For the head-to-head comparison, a 5-point Likert scale to assess image quality, considering artifacts, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), anatomical structure visualization, and overall diagnostic quality. We applied a 15% noninferiority margin to determine whether the DL-accelerated protocol was noninferior.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences existed between protocols when evaluating foraminal and spinal canal stenosis, nerve compression, or facet arthropathy (all <i>p</i> > .05). The DL-spine protocol was noninferior for overall diagnostic quality and visualization of the cord, CSF, intervertebral disc, and nerve roots. However, it exhibited reduced SNR and increased artifact perception. Interobserver reproducibility ranged from moderate to substantial (κ = 0.50-0.76).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study indicates that DL reconstruction in spine imaging effectively reduces acquisition times while maintaining comparable diagnostic quality to conventional MRI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47358,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuroradiology Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"323-331\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11138337/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuroradiology Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19714009231224428\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROIMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroradiology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19714009231224428","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:深度学习(DL)加速磁共振成像技术已成为加速常规磁共振成像检查的一种有前途的方法。虽然之前的研究探索了特定腰椎 MRI 序列的 DL 加速,但在理解完全基于 DL 的 MRI 方案对常规腰椎 MRI 扫描时间和诊断质量的影响方面仍存在差距。为了解决这个问题,我们评估了 DL 加速腰椎 MRI 方案与传统方案相比的图像质量和诊断性能:我们对 36 名连续接受非对比增强腰椎 MRI 检查的门诊患者进行了前瞻性评估。两种方案均包括矢状位 T1、T2、STIR 和轴位 T2 加权图像。两名盲法神经放射科医生分别独立审查图像中的椎管狭窄、椎管狭窄、神经根受压和面关节病。分级比较采用 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验。在头对头比较中,我们采用 5 点李克特量表来评估图像质量,其中考虑了伪影、信噪比(SNR)、解剖结构可视化和整体诊断质量。我们采用15%的非劣效边际来确定DL加速方案是否非劣效:结果:在评估椎孔和椎管狭窄、神经压迫或关节面病变时,不同方案之间不存在明显差异(均 p > .05)。DL-spine方案在整体诊断质量以及脊髓、脑脊液、椎间盘和神经根的可视化方面并不逊色。但是,它的信噪比降低,伪影感知增加。观察者之间的再现性从中等到相当可观(κ = 0.50-0.76):我们的研究表明,脊柱成像中的 DL 重建可有效缩短采集时间,同时保持与传统 MRI 相当的诊断质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic evaluation of deep learning accelerated lumbar spine MRI.

Background and purpose: Deep learning (DL) accelerated MR techniques have emerged as a promising approach to accelerate routine MR exams. While prior studies explored DL acceleration for specific lumbar MRI sequences, a gap remains in comprehending the impact of a fully DL-based MRI protocol on scan time and diagnostic quality for routine lumbar spine MRI. To address this, we assessed the image quality and diagnostic performance of a DL-accelerated lumbar spine MRI protocol in comparison to a conventional protocol.

Methods: We prospectively evaluated 36 consecutive outpatients undergoing non-contrast enhanced lumbar spine MRIs. Both protocols included sagittal T1, T2, STIR, and axial T2-weighted images. Two blinded neuroradiologists independently reviewed images for foraminal stenosis, spinal canal stenosis, nerve root compression, and facet arthropathy. Grading comparison employed the Wilcoxon signed rank test. For the head-to-head comparison, a 5-point Likert scale to assess image quality, considering artifacts, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), anatomical structure visualization, and overall diagnostic quality. We applied a 15% noninferiority margin to determine whether the DL-accelerated protocol was noninferior.

Results: No significant differences existed between protocols when evaluating foraminal and spinal canal stenosis, nerve compression, or facet arthropathy (all p > .05). The DL-spine protocol was noninferior for overall diagnostic quality and visualization of the cord, CSF, intervertebral disc, and nerve roots. However, it exhibited reduced SNR and increased artifact perception. Interobserver reproducibility ranged from moderate to substantial (κ = 0.50-0.76).

Conclusion: Our study indicates that DL reconstruction in spine imaging effectively reduces acquisition times while maintaining comparable diagnostic quality to conventional MRI.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neuroradiology Journal
Neuroradiology Journal NEUROIMAGING-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
101
期刊介绍: NRJ - The Neuroradiology Journal (formerly Rivista di Neuroradiologia) is the official journal of the Italian Association of Neuroradiology and of the several Scientific Societies from all over the world. Founded in 1988 as Rivista di Neuroradiologia, of June 2006 evolved in NRJ - The Neuroradiology Journal. It is published bimonthly.
×
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