Hui Tang, Ming Hong, Lu Yu, Yang Song, Mengqiu Cao, Lei Xiang, Yan Zhou, Shiteng Suo
{"title":"用于腰椎磁共振成像加速的深度学习重建:一项前瞻性研究。","authors":"Hui Tang, Ming Hong, Lu Yu, Yang Song, Mengqiu Cao, Lei Xiang, Yan Zhou, Shiteng Suo","doi":"10.1186/s41747-024-00470-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) turbo spin-echo images reconstructed using a deep learning technique (TSE-DL) with standard turbo spin-echo (TSE-SD) images of the lumbar spine regarding image quality and detection performance of common degenerative pathologies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, single-center study included 31 patients (15 males and 16 females; aged 51 ± 16 years (mean ± standard deviation)) who underwent lumbar spine exams with both TSE-SD and TSE-DL acquisitions for degenerative spine diseases. Images were analyzed by two radiologists and assessed for qualitative image quality using a 4-point Likert scale, quantitative signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of anatomic landmarks, and detection of common pathologies. Paired-sample t, Wilcoxon, and McNemar tests, unweighted/linearly weighted Cohen κ statistics, and intraclass correlation coefficients were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Scan time for TSE-DL and TSE-SD protocols was 2:55 and 5:17 min:s, respectively. The overall image quality was either significantly higher for TSE-DL or not significantly different between TSE-SD and TSE-DL. TSE-DL demonstrated higher SNR and subject noise scores than TSE-SD. For pathology detection, the interreader agreement was substantial to almost perfect for TSE-DL, with κ values ranging from 0.61 to 1.00; the interprotocol agreement was almost perfect for both readers, with κ values ranging from 0.84 to 1.00. There was no significant difference in the diagnostic confidence or detection rate of common pathologies between the two sequences (p ≥ 0.081).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TSE-DL allowed for a 45% reduction in scan time over TSE-SD in lumbar spine MRI without compromising the overall image quality and showed comparable detection performance of common pathologies in the evaluation of degenerative lumbar spine changes.</p><p><strong>Relevance statement: </strong>Deep learning-reconstructed lumbar spine MRI protocol enabled a 45% reduction in scan time compared with conventional reconstruction, with comparable image quality and detection performance of common degenerative pathologies.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>• Lumbar spine MRI with deep learning reconstruction has broad application prospects. • Deep learning reconstruction of lumbar spine MRI saved 45% scan time without compromising overall image quality. • When compared with standard sequences, deep learning reconstruction showed similar detection performance of common degenerative lumbar spine pathologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":36926,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology Experimental","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11189847/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deep learning reconstruction for lumbar spine MRI acceleration: a prospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Hui Tang, Ming Hong, Lu Yu, Yang Song, Mengqiu Cao, Lei Xiang, Yan Zhou, Shiteng Suo\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41747-024-00470-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) turbo spin-echo images reconstructed using a deep learning technique (TSE-DL) with standard turbo spin-echo (TSE-SD) images of the lumbar spine regarding image quality and detection performance of common degenerative pathologies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, single-center study included 31 patients (15 males and 16 females; aged 51 ± 16 years (mean ± standard deviation)) who underwent lumbar spine exams with both TSE-SD and TSE-DL acquisitions for degenerative spine diseases. Images were analyzed by two radiologists and assessed for qualitative image quality using a 4-point Likert scale, quantitative signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of anatomic landmarks, and detection of common pathologies. Paired-sample t, Wilcoxon, and McNemar tests, unweighted/linearly weighted Cohen κ statistics, and intraclass correlation coefficients were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Scan time for TSE-DL and TSE-SD protocols was 2:55 and 5:17 min:s, respectively. The overall image quality was either significantly higher for TSE-DL or not significantly different between TSE-SD and TSE-DL. TSE-DL demonstrated higher SNR and subject noise scores than TSE-SD. For pathology detection, the interreader agreement was substantial to almost perfect for TSE-DL, with κ values ranging from 0.61 to 1.00; the interprotocol agreement was almost perfect for both readers, with κ values ranging from 0.84 to 1.00. There was no significant difference in the diagnostic confidence or detection rate of common pathologies between the two sequences (p ≥ 0.081).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TSE-DL allowed for a 45% reduction in scan time over TSE-SD in lumbar spine MRI without compromising the overall image quality and showed comparable detection performance of common pathologies in the evaluation of degenerative lumbar spine changes.</p><p><strong>Relevance statement: </strong>Deep learning-reconstructed lumbar spine MRI protocol enabled a 45% reduction in scan time compared with conventional reconstruction, with comparable image quality and detection performance of common degenerative pathologies.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>• Lumbar spine MRI with deep learning reconstruction has broad application prospects. • Deep learning reconstruction of lumbar spine MRI saved 45% scan time without compromising overall image quality. • When compared with standard sequences, deep learning reconstruction showed similar detection performance of common degenerative lumbar spine pathologies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36926,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Radiology Experimental\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11189847/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Radiology Experimental\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-024-00470-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology Experimental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-024-00470-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Deep learning reconstruction for lumbar spine MRI acceleration: a prospective study.
Background: We compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) turbo spin-echo images reconstructed using a deep learning technique (TSE-DL) with standard turbo spin-echo (TSE-SD) images of the lumbar spine regarding image quality and detection performance of common degenerative pathologies.
Methods: This prospective, single-center study included 31 patients (15 males and 16 females; aged 51 ± 16 years (mean ± standard deviation)) who underwent lumbar spine exams with both TSE-SD and TSE-DL acquisitions for degenerative spine diseases. Images were analyzed by two radiologists and assessed for qualitative image quality using a 4-point Likert scale, quantitative signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of anatomic landmarks, and detection of common pathologies. Paired-sample t, Wilcoxon, and McNemar tests, unweighted/linearly weighted Cohen κ statistics, and intraclass correlation coefficients were used.
Results: Scan time for TSE-DL and TSE-SD protocols was 2:55 and 5:17 min:s, respectively. The overall image quality was either significantly higher for TSE-DL or not significantly different between TSE-SD and TSE-DL. TSE-DL demonstrated higher SNR and subject noise scores than TSE-SD. For pathology detection, the interreader agreement was substantial to almost perfect for TSE-DL, with κ values ranging from 0.61 to 1.00; the interprotocol agreement was almost perfect for both readers, with κ values ranging from 0.84 to 1.00. There was no significant difference in the diagnostic confidence or detection rate of common pathologies between the two sequences (p ≥ 0.081).
Conclusions: TSE-DL allowed for a 45% reduction in scan time over TSE-SD in lumbar spine MRI without compromising the overall image quality and showed comparable detection performance of common pathologies in the evaluation of degenerative lumbar spine changes.
Relevance statement: Deep learning-reconstructed lumbar spine MRI protocol enabled a 45% reduction in scan time compared with conventional reconstruction, with comparable image quality and detection performance of common degenerative pathologies.
Key points: • Lumbar spine MRI with deep learning reconstruction has broad application prospects. • Deep learning reconstruction of lumbar spine MRI saved 45% scan time without compromising overall image quality. • When compared with standard sequences, deep learning reconstruction showed similar detection performance of common degenerative lumbar spine pathologies.