Robert Haase, Thomas Pinetz, Erich Kobler, Zeynep Bendella, Daniel Paech, Ralf Clauberg, Martha Foltyn-Dumitru, Verena Wagner, Kai Schlamp, Gudula Heussel, Claus Peter Heussel, Martin Vahlensieck, Julian A Luetkens, Heinz-Peter Schlemmer, Louisa Specht-Riemenschneider, Alexander Radbruch, Alexander Effland, Katerina Deike
{"title":"脑MRI真实和人工t1加权对比后图像的转移检测。","authors":"Robert Haase, Thomas Pinetz, Erich Kobler, Zeynep Bendella, Daniel Paech, Ralf Clauberg, Martha Foltyn-Dumitru, Verena Wagner, Kai Schlamp, Gudula Heussel, Claus Peter Heussel, Martin Vahlensieck, Julian A Luetkens, Heinz-Peter Schlemmer, Louisa Specht-Riemenschneider, Alexander Radbruch, Alexander Effland, Katerina Deike","doi":"10.1097/RLI.0000000000001137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Small lesions are the limiting factor for reducing gadolinium-based contrast agents in brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity and precision in metastasis detection on true contrast-enhanced T1-weighted (T1w) images and artificial images synthesized by a deep learning method using low-dose images.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective, multicenter study (5 centers, 12 scanners), 917 participants underwent brain MRI between October 2021 and March 2023 including T1w low-dose (0.033 mmol/kg) and full-dose (0.1 mmol/kg) images. Forty participants with metastases or unremarkable brain findings were evaluated in a reading (mean age ± SD, 54.3 ± 15.1 years; 24 men). True and artificial T1w images were assessed for metastases in random order with 4 weeks between readings by 2 neuroradiologists. A reference reader reviewed all data to confirm metastases. Performances were compared using mid- P McNemar tests for sensitivity and Wilcoxon signed rank tests for false-positive findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The reference reader identified 97 metastases. The sensitivity of reader 1 did not differ significantly between sequences (sensitivity [precision]: true, 66.0% [98.5%]; artificial, 61.9% [98.4%]; P = 0.38). With a lower precision than reader 1, reader 2 found significantly more metastases using true images (sensitivity [precision]: true, 78.4% [87.4%]; artificial, 60.8% [80.8%]; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in sensitivity for metastases ≥5 mm. The number of false-positive findings did not differ significantly between sequences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>One reader showed a significantly higher overall sensitivity using true images. The similar detection performance for metastases ≥5 mm is promising for applying low-dose imaging in less challenging diagnostic tasks than metastasis detection.</p>","PeriodicalId":14486,"journal":{"name":"Investigative Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Metastasis Detection Using True and Artificial T1-Weighted Postcontrast Images in Brain MRI.\",\"authors\":\"Robert Haase, Thomas Pinetz, Erich Kobler, Zeynep Bendella, Daniel Paech, Ralf Clauberg, Martha Foltyn-Dumitru, Verena Wagner, Kai Schlamp, Gudula Heussel, Claus Peter Heussel, Martin Vahlensieck, Julian A Luetkens, Heinz-Peter Schlemmer, Louisa Specht-Riemenschneider, Alexander Radbruch, Alexander Effland, Katerina Deike\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/RLI.0000000000001137\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Small lesions are the limiting factor for reducing gadolinium-based contrast agents in brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity and precision in metastasis detection on true contrast-enhanced T1-weighted (T1w) images and artificial images synthesized by a deep learning method using low-dose images.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective, multicenter study (5 centers, 12 scanners), 917 participants underwent brain MRI between October 2021 and March 2023 including T1w low-dose (0.033 mmol/kg) and full-dose (0.1 mmol/kg) images. Forty participants with metastases or unremarkable brain findings were evaluated in a reading (mean age ± SD, 54.3 ± 15.1 years; 24 men). True and artificial T1w images were assessed for metastases in random order with 4 weeks between readings by 2 neuroradiologists. A reference reader reviewed all data to confirm metastases. Performances were compared using mid- P McNemar tests for sensitivity and Wilcoxon signed rank tests for false-positive findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The reference reader identified 97 metastases. The sensitivity of reader 1 did not differ significantly between sequences (sensitivity [precision]: true, 66.0% [98.5%]; artificial, 61.9% [98.4%]; P = 0.38). With a lower precision than reader 1, reader 2 found significantly more metastases using true images (sensitivity [precision]: true, 78.4% [87.4%]; artificial, 60.8% [80.8%]; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in sensitivity for metastases ≥5 mm. The number of false-positive findings did not differ significantly between sequences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>One reader showed a significantly higher overall sensitivity using true images. The similar detection performance for metastases ≥5 mm is promising for applying low-dose imaging in less challenging diagnostic tasks than metastasis detection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14486,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Investigative Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Investigative Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000001137\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"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":"Investigative Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000001137","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Metastasis Detection Using True and Artificial T1-Weighted Postcontrast Images in Brain MRI.
Objectives: Small lesions are the limiting factor for reducing gadolinium-based contrast agents in brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity and precision in metastasis detection on true contrast-enhanced T1-weighted (T1w) images and artificial images synthesized by a deep learning method using low-dose images.
Materials and methods: In this prospective, multicenter study (5 centers, 12 scanners), 917 participants underwent brain MRI between October 2021 and March 2023 including T1w low-dose (0.033 mmol/kg) and full-dose (0.1 mmol/kg) images. Forty participants with metastases or unremarkable brain findings were evaluated in a reading (mean age ± SD, 54.3 ± 15.1 years; 24 men). True and artificial T1w images were assessed for metastases in random order with 4 weeks between readings by 2 neuroradiologists. A reference reader reviewed all data to confirm metastases. Performances were compared using mid- P McNemar tests for sensitivity and Wilcoxon signed rank tests for false-positive findings.
Results: The reference reader identified 97 metastases. The sensitivity of reader 1 did not differ significantly between sequences (sensitivity [precision]: true, 66.0% [98.5%]; artificial, 61.9% [98.4%]; P = 0.38). With a lower precision than reader 1, reader 2 found significantly more metastases using true images (sensitivity [precision]: true, 78.4% [87.4%]; artificial, 60.8% [80.8%]; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in sensitivity for metastases ≥5 mm. The number of false-positive findings did not differ significantly between sequences.
Conclusions: One reader showed a significantly higher overall sensitivity using true images. The similar detection performance for metastases ≥5 mm is promising for applying low-dose imaging in less challenging diagnostic tasks than metastasis detection.
期刊介绍:
Investigative Radiology publishes original, peer-reviewed reports on clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, and related modalities. Emphasis is on early and timely publication. Primarily research-oriented, the journal also includes a wide variety of features of interest to clinical radiologists.