Cargando…

Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation

PURPOSE: To compare liver MRI with AIR Recon Deep Learning™(ARDL) algorithm applied and turned-off (NON-DL) with conventional high-resolution acquisition (NAÏVE) sequences, in terms of quantitative and qualitative image analysis and scanning time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study include...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zerunian, Marta, Pucciarelli, Francesco, Caruso, Damiano, Polici, Michela, Masci, Benedetta, Guido, Gisella, De Santis, Domenico, Polverari, Daniele, Principessa, Daniele, Benvenga, Antonella, Iannicelli, Elsa, Laghi, Andrea
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Milan 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9512724/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36070066
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01539-9
_version_ 1784797894416531456
author Zerunian, Marta
Pucciarelli, Francesco
Caruso, Damiano
Polici, Michela
Masci, Benedetta
Guido, Gisella
De Santis, Domenico
Polverari, Daniele
Principessa, Daniele
Benvenga, Antonella
Iannicelli, Elsa
Laghi, Andrea
author_facet Zerunian, Marta
Pucciarelli, Francesco
Caruso, Damiano
Polici, Michela
Masci, Benedetta
Guido, Gisella
De Santis, Domenico
Polverari, Daniele
Principessa, Daniele
Benvenga, Antonella
Iannicelli, Elsa
Laghi, Andrea
author_sort Zerunian, Marta
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare liver MRI with AIR Recon Deep Learning™(ARDL) algorithm applied and turned-off (NON-DL) with conventional high-resolution acquisition (NAÏVE) sequences, in terms of quantitative and qualitative image analysis and scanning time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study included fifty consecutive volunteers (31 female, mean age 55.5 ± 20 years) from September to November 2021. 1.5 T MRI was performed and included three sets of images: axial single-shot fast spin-echo (SSFSE) T2 images, diffusion-weighted images(DWI) and apparent diffusion coefficient(ADC) maps acquired with both ARDL and NAÏVE protocol; the NON-DL images, were also assessed. Two radiologists in consensus drew fixed regions of interest in liver parenchyma to calculate signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) and contrast to-noise-ratio (CNR). Subjective image quality was assessed by two other radiologists independently with a five-point Likert scale. Acquisition time was recorded. RESULTS: SSFSE T2 objective analysis showed higher SNR and CNR for ARDL vs NAÏVE, ARDL vs NON-DL(all P < 0.013). Regarding DWI, no differences were found for SNR with ARDL vs NAÏVE and, ARDL vs NON-DL (all P > 0.2517).CNR was higher for ARDL vs NON-DL(P = 0.0170), whereas no differences were found between ARDL and NAÏVE(P = 1). No differences were observed for all three comparisons, in terms of SNR and CNR, for ADC maps (all P > 0.32). Qualitative analysis for all sequences showed better overall image quality for ARDL with lower truncation artifacts, higher sharpness and contrast (all P < 0.0070) with excellent inter-rater agreement (k ≥ 0.8143). Acquisition time was lower in ARDL sequences compared to NAÏVE (SSFSE T2 = 19.08 ± 2.5 s vs. 24.1 ± 2 s and DWI = 207.3 ± 54 s vs. 513.6 ± 98.6 s, all P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: ARDL applied on upper abdomen showed overall better image quality and reduced scanning time compared with NAÏVE protocol.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9512724
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Milan
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95127242022-09-28 Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation Zerunian, Marta Pucciarelli, Francesco Caruso, Damiano Polici, Michela Masci, Benedetta Guido, Gisella De Santis, Domenico Polverari, Daniele Principessa, Daniele Benvenga, Antonella Iannicelli, Elsa Laghi, Andrea Radiol Med Abdominal Radiology PURPOSE: To compare liver MRI with AIR Recon Deep Learning™(ARDL) algorithm applied and turned-off (NON-DL) with conventional high-resolution acquisition (NAÏVE) sequences, in terms of quantitative and qualitative image analysis and scanning time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study included fifty consecutive volunteers (31 female, mean age 55.5 ± 20 years) from September to November 2021. 1.5 T MRI was performed and included three sets of images: axial single-shot fast spin-echo (SSFSE) T2 images, diffusion-weighted images(DWI) and apparent diffusion coefficient(ADC) maps acquired with both ARDL and NAÏVE protocol; the NON-DL images, were also assessed. Two radiologists in consensus drew fixed regions of interest in liver parenchyma to calculate signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) and contrast to-noise-ratio (CNR). Subjective image quality was assessed by two other radiologists independently with a five-point Likert scale. Acquisition time was recorded. RESULTS: SSFSE T2 objective analysis showed higher SNR and CNR for ARDL vs NAÏVE, ARDL vs NON-DL(all P < 0.013). Regarding DWI, no differences were found for SNR with ARDL vs NAÏVE and, ARDL vs NON-DL (all P > 0.2517).CNR was higher for ARDL vs NON-DL(P = 0.0170), whereas no differences were found between ARDL and NAÏVE(P = 1). No differences were observed for all three comparisons, in terms of SNR and CNR, for ADC maps (all P > 0.32). Qualitative analysis for all sequences showed better overall image quality for ARDL with lower truncation artifacts, higher sharpness and contrast (all P < 0.0070) with excellent inter-rater agreement (k ≥ 0.8143). Acquisition time was lower in ARDL sequences compared to NAÏVE (SSFSE T2 = 19.08 ± 2.5 s vs. 24.1 ± 2 s and DWI = 207.3 ± 54 s vs. 513.6 ± 98.6 s, all P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: ARDL applied on upper abdomen showed overall better image quality and reduced scanning time compared with NAÏVE protocol. Springer Milan 2022-09-07 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9512724/ /pubmed/36070066 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01539-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Abdominal Radiology
Zerunian, Marta
Pucciarelli, Francesco
Caruso, Damiano
Polici, Michela
Masci, Benedetta
Guido, Gisella
De Santis, Domenico
Polverari, Daniele
Principessa, Daniele
Benvenga, Antonella
Iannicelli, Elsa
Laghi, Andrea
Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation
title Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation
title_full Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation
title_fullStr Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation
title_short Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation
title_sort artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver mri: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation
topic Abdominal Radiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9512724/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36070066
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01539-9
work_keys_str_mv AT zerunianmarta artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT pucciarellifrancesco artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT carusodamiano artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT policimichela artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT mascibenedetta artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT guidogisella artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT desantisdomenico artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT polveraridaniele artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT principessadaniele artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT benvengaantonella artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT iannicellielsa artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation
AT laghiandrea artificialintelligencebasedimagequalityenhancementinlivermriaquantitativeandqualitativeevaluation