Litcius/Paper detail

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

Marta Zerunian, Francesco Pucciarelli, Damiano Caruso, Michela Polici, Benedetta Masci, Gisella Guido, Domenico De Santis, Daniele Polverari, Daniele Principessa, Antonella Benvenga, Elsa Iannicelli, Andrea Laghi

2022La radiologia medica59 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

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.

Topics & Concepts

Image qualityNuclear medicineEffective diffusion coefficientMedicineDiffusion MRIMathematicsMagnetic resonance imagingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceRadiologyImage (mathematics)MRI in cancer diagnosisRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Artificial intelligence based image quality enhancement in liver MRI: a quantitative and qualitative evaluation | Litcius