{"title":"机器和深度学习用于基于mri的肝铁超载量化:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Mohammadreza Elhaie, Abolfazl Koozari, Qurain Turki Alshammari","doi":"10.1007/s00117-025-01513-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Liver iron overload, associated with conditions such as hereditary hemochromatosis and β‑thalassemia major, requires accurate quantification of liver iron concentration (LIC) to guide timely interventions and prevent complications. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard for noninvasive LIC assessment, but challenges in protocol variability and diagnostic consistency persist. Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) offer potential to enhance MRI-based LIC quantification, yet their efficacy remains underexplored.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic accuracy, algorithmic performance, and clinical applicability of ML and DL techniques for MRI-based LIC quantification in liver iron overload, adhering to PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and IEEE Xplore identified studies applying ML/DL to MRI-based LIC quantification. Eligible studies were assessed for diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, AUC), LIC quantification precision (correlation, mean absolute error), and clinical applicability (automation, processing time). Methodological quality was evaluated using the QUADAS‑2 tool, with qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis where feasible.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies were included, employing algorithms such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), radiomics, and fuzzy C‑mean clustering on T2*-weighted and multiparametric MRI. Pooled diagnostic accuracy from three studies showed a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66-0.88) and specificity of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.64-0.86), with an AUC of 0.84. The DL methods demonstrated high precision (e.g., Pearson's r = 0.999) and automation, reducing processing times to as low as 0.1 s/slice. Limitations included heterogeneity, limited generalizability, and small external validation sets.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both ML and DL enhance MRI-based LIC quantification, offering high accuracy and efficiency. Standardized protocols and multicenter validation are needed to ensure clinical scalability and equitable access.</p>","PeriodicalId":74635,"journal":{"name":"Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Machine and deep learning for MRI-based quantification of liver iron overload: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammadreza Elhaie, Abolfazl Koozari, Qurain Turki Alshammari\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00117-025-01513-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Liver iron overload, associated with conditions such as hereditary hemochromatosis and β‑thalassemia major, requires accurate quantification of liver iron concentration (LIC) to guide timely interventions and prevent complications. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard for noninvasive LIC assessment, but challenges in protocol variability and diagnostic consistency persist. Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) offer potential to enhance MRI-based LIC quantification, yet their efficacy remains underexplored.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic accuracy, algorithmic performance, and clinical applicability of ML and DL techniques for MRI-based LIC quantification in liver iron overload, adhering to PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and IEEE Xplore identified studies applying ML/DL to MRI-based LIC quantification. Eligible studies were assessed for diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, AUC), LIC quantification precision (correlation, mean absolute error), and clinical applicability (automation, processing time). Methodological quality was evaluated using the QUADAS‑2 tool, with qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis where feasible.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies were included, employing algorithms such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), radiomics, and fuzzy C‑mean clustering on T2*-weighted and multiparametric MRI. Pooled diagnostic accuracy from three studies showed a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66-0.88) and specificity of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.64-0.86), with an AUC of 0.84. The DL methods demonstrated high precision (e.g., Pearson's r = 0.999) and automation, reducing processing times to as low as 0.1 s/slice. Limitations included heterogeneity, limited generalizability, and small external validation sets.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both ML and DL enhance MRI-based LIC quantification, offering high accuracy and efficiency. Standardized protocols and multicenter validation are needed to ensure clinical scalability and equitable access.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74635,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-025-01513-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-025-01513-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:肝铁超载与遗传性血色素沉着症和重度β -地中海贫血等疾病相关,需要准确量化肝铁浓度(LIC),以指导及时干预和预防并发症。磁共振成像(MRI)是无创LIC评估的金标准,但在方案可变性和诊断一致性方面仍然存在挑战。机器学习(ML)和深度学习(DL)提供了增强基于mri的LIC量化的潜力,但它们的功效仍未得到充分探索。目的:本系统综述和荟萃分析在遵循PRISMA指南的前提下,评估基于mri的肝铁超载LIC定量的ML和DL技术的诊断准确性、算法性能和临床适用性。方法:在PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Web of Science、Cochrane Library和IEEE explore中进行综合搜索,确定了将ML/DL应用于基于mri的LIC定量的研究。评估符合条件的研究的诊断准确性(敏感性、特异性、AUC)、LIC定量精度(相关性、平均绝对误差)和临床适用性(自动化、处理时间)。使用QUADAS‑2工具评估方法学质量,在可行的情况下进行定性综合和meta分析。结果:纳入8项研究,采用卷积神经网络(cnn)、放射组学和模糊C均值聚类等算法对T2*加权和多参数MRI进行分析。三项研究的合并诊断准确性显示敏感性为0.79 (95% CI: 0.66-0.88),特异性为0.77 (95% CI: 0.64-0.86), AUC为0.84。DL方法显示出高精度(例如,Pearson's r = 0.999)和自动化,将处理时间降低到0.1 s/片。局限性包括异质性、有限的通用性和较小的外部验证集。结论:ML和DL均可增强基于mri的LIC定量,具有较高的准确性和效率。需要标准化的协议和多中心验证来确保临床可扩展性和公平获取。
Machine and deep learning for MRI-based quantification of liver iron overload: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Liver iron overload, associated with conditions such as hereditary hemochromatosis and β‑thalassemia major, requires accurate quantification of liver iron concentration (LIC) to guide timely interventions and prevent complications. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard for noninvasive LIC assessment, but challenges in protocol variability and diagnostic consistency persist. Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) offer potential to enhance MRI-based LIC quantification, yet their efficacy remains underexplored.
Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic accuracy, algorithmic performance, and clinical applicability of ML and DL techniques for MRI-based LIC quantification in liver iron overload, adhering to PRISMA guidelines.
Methods: A comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and IEEE Xplore identified studies applying ML/DL to MRI-based LIC quantification. Eligible studies were assessed for diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, AUC), LIC quantification precision (correlation, mean absolute error), and clinical applicability (automation, processing time). Methodological quality was evaluated using the QUADAS‑2 tool, with qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis where feasible.
Results: Eight studies were included, employing algorithms such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), radiomics, and fuzzy C‑mean clustering on T2*-weighted and multiparametric MRI. Pooled diagnostic accuracy from three studies showed a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66-0.88) and specificity of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.64-0.86), with an AUC of 0.84. The DL methods demonstrated high precision (e.g., Pearson's r = 0.999) and automation, reducing processing times to as low as 0.1 s/slice. Limitations included heterogeneity, limited generalizability, and small external validation sets.
Conclusion: Both ML and DL enhance MRI-based LIC quantification, offering high accuracy and efficiency. Standardized protocols and multicenter validation are needed to ensure clinical scalability and equitable access.