深度学习驱动的简易膝关节MRI方案:临床实践中的诊断准确性。

IF 4.8 1区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Radiologia Medica Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-04 DOI:10.1007/s11547-025-02038-3
Giovanni Foti, Flavio Spoto, Alessandro Spezia, Luigi Romano, Simone Caia, Francesco Camerani, Damiano Benedetti, Thomas Mignolli
{"title":"深度学习驱动的简易膝关节MRI方案:临床实践中的诊断准确性。","authors":"Giovanni Foti, Flavio Spoto, Alessandro Spezia, Luigi Romano, Simone Caia, Francesco Camerani, Damiano Benedetti, Thomas Mignolli","doi":"10.1007/s11547-025-02038-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Deep learning (DL) reconstruction shows potential in reducing MRI acquisition times while preserving image quality, but the impact of varying acceleration factors on knee MRI diagnostic accuracy remains undefined.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Evaluate diagnostic performance of twofold, fourfold, and sixfold DL-accelerated knee MRI protocols versus standard protocols.</p><p><strong>Materials/methods: </strong>In this prospective study, 71 consecutive patients underwent knee MRI with standard, DL2, DL4, and DL6 accelerated protocols. Four radiologists assessed ligament tears, meniscal lesions, bone marrow edema, chondropathy, and extensor abnormalities. Sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DL2 and DL4 demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy. For ACL tears, DL2/DL4 achieved 98-100% sensitivity/specificity, while DL6 showed reduced sensitivity (91-96%). In meniscal evaluation, DL2 maintained 96-100% sensitivity and 98-100% specificity; DL4 showed 94-98% sensitivity and 97-99% specificity. DL6 exhibited decreased sensitivity (82-92%) for subtle lesions. Bone marrow edema detection remained excellent across acceleration factors. Interobserver agreement was excellent for DL2/DL4 (W = 0.91-0.97) and good for DL6 (W = 0.78-0.89).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DL2 protocols demonstrate performance nearly identical to standard protocols, while DL4 maintains acceptable diagnostic accuracy for most pathologies. DL6 shows reduced sensitivity for subtle abnormalities, particularly among less experienced readers. DL2 and DL4 protocols represent optimal balance between acquisition time reduction (50-75%) and diagnostic confidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":20817,"journal":{"name":"Radiologia Medica","volume":" ","pages":"1460-1471"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deep learning-driven abbreviated knee MRI protocols: diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice.\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Foti, Flavio Spoto, Alessandro Spezia, Luigi Romano, Simone Caia, Francesco Camerani, Damiano Benedetti, Thomas Mignolli\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11547-025-02038-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Deep learning (DL) reconstruction shows potential in reducing MRI acquisition times while preserving image quality, but the impact of varying acceleration factors on knee MRI diagnostic accuracy remains undefined.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Evaluate diagnostic performance of twofold, fourfold, and sixfold DL-accelerated knee MRI protocols versus standard protocols.</p><p><strong>Materials/methods: </strong>In this prospective study, 71 consecutive patients underwent knee MRI with standard, DL2, DL4, and DL6 accelerated protocols. Four radiologists assessed ligament tears, meniscal lesions, bone marrow edema, chondropathy, and extensor abnormalities. Sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DL2 and DL4 demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy. For ACL tears, DL2/DL4 achieved 98-100% sensitivity/specificity, while DL6 showed reduced sensitivity (91-96%). In meniscal evaluation, DL2 maintained 96-100% sensitivity and 98-100% specificity; DL4 showed 94-98% sensitivity and 97-99% specificity. DL6 exhibited decreased sensitivity (82-92%) for subtle lesions. Bone marrow edema detection remained excellent across acceleration factors. Interobserver agreement was excellent for DL2/DL4 (W = 0.91-0.97) and good for DL6 (W = 0.78-0.89).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DL2 protocols demonstrate performance nearly identical to standard protocols, while DL4 maintains acceptable diagnostic accuracy for most pathologies. DL6 shows reduced sensitivity for subtle abnormalities, particularly among less experienced readers. DL2 and DL4 protocols represent optimal balance between acquisition time reduction (50-75%) and diagnostic confidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20817,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiologia Medica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1460-1471\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiologia Medica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-025-02038-3\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiologia Medica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-025-02038-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:深度学习(DL)重建显示出在保持图像质量的同时减少MRI采集时间的潜力,但不同加速度因素对膝关节MRI诊断准确性的影响尚不明确。目的:评估两倍、四倍和六倍dl加速膝关节MRI方案与标准方案的诊断性能。材料/方法:在这项前瞻性研究中,71例连续患者接受了标准、DL2、DL4和DL6加速方案的膝关节MRI。四名放射科医生评估了韧带撕裂、半月板病变、骨髓水肿、软骨病变和伸肌异常。计算敏感性、特异性和观察者间一致性。结果:DL2和DL4具有较高的诊断准确性。对于ACL撕裂,DL2/DL4达到98-100%的敏感性/特异性,而DL6的敏感性降低(91-96%)。在半月板评估中,DL2保持96-100%的敏感性和98-100%的特异性;DL4敏感性为94-98%,特异性为97-99%。DL6对细微病变的敏感性降低(82-92%)。骨髓水肿的检测在不同的加速因素下仍然很好。观察者间一致性对DL2/DL4非常好(W = 0.91-0.97),对DL6很好(W = 0.78-0.89)。结论:DL2协议表现出与标准协议几乎相同的性能,而DL4对大多数病理保持可接受的诊断准确性。DL6显示出对细微异常的敏感度降低,尤其是在缺乏经验的读者中。DL2和DL4协议代表了采集时间减少(50-75%)和诊断置信度之间的最佳平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deep learning-driven abbreviated knee MRI protocols: diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice.

Background: Deep learning (DL) reconstruction shows potential in reducing MRI acquisition times while preserving image quality, but the impact of varying acceleration factors on knee MRI diagnostic accuracy remains undefined.

Purpose: Evaluate diagnostic performance of twofold, fourfold, and sixfold DL-accelerated knee MRI protocols versus standard protocols.

Materials/methods: In this prospective study, 71 consecutive patients underwent knee MRI with standard, DL2, DL4, and DL6 accelerated protocols. Four radiologists assessed ligament tears, meniscal lesions, bone marrow edema, chondropathy, and extensor abnormalities. Sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement were calculated.

Results: DL2 and DL4 demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy. For ACL tears, DL2/DL4 achieved 98-100% sensitivity/specificity, while DL6 showed reduced sensitivity (91-96%). In meniscal evaluation, DL2 maintained 96-100% sensitivity and 98-100% specificity; DL4 showed 94-98% sensitivity and 97-99% specificity. DL6 exhibited decreased sensitivity (82-92%) for subtle lesions. Bone marrow edema detection remained excellent across acceleration factors. Interobserver agreement was excellent for DL2/DL4 (W = 0.91-0.97) and good for DL6 (W = 0.78-0.89).

Conclusion: DL2 protocols demonstrate performance nearly identical to standard protocols, while DL4 maintains acceptable diagnostic accuracy for most pathologies. DL6 shows reduced sensitivity for subtle abnormalities, particularly among less experienced readers. DL2 and DL4 protocols represent optimal balance between acquisition time reduction (50-75%) and diagnostic confidence.

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
Radiologia Medica
Radiologia Medica 医学-核医学
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
7.90%
发文量
133
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Felice Perussia founded La radiologia medica in 1914. It is a peer-reviewed journal and serves as the official journal of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM). The primary purpose of the journal is to disseminate information related to Radiology, especially advancements in diagnostic imaging and related disciplines. La radiologia medica welcomes original research on both fundamental and clinical aspects of modern radiology, with a particular focus on diagnostic and interventional imaging techniques. It also covers topics such as radiotherapy, nuclear medicine, radiobiology, health physics, and artificial intelligence in the context of clinical implications. The journal includes various types of contributions such as original articles, review articles, editorials, short reports, and letters to the editor. With an esteemed Editorial Board and a selection of insightful reports, the journal is an indispensable resource for radiologists and professionals in related fields. Ultimately, La radiologia medica aims to serve as a platform for international collaboration and knowledge sharing within the radiological community.
×
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