Deep Learning-Enhanced Parallel Imaging and Simultaneous Multislice Acceleration Reconstruction in Knee MRI. Issue 12 (1st December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kim, MinWoo; Lee, Sang-Min; Park, Chankue; Lee, Dongeon; Kim, Kang Soo; Jeong, Hee Seok; Kim, Shinyoung; Choi, Min-Hyeok; Nickel, Dominik
• Is Part Of: Investigative radiology. Volume 57:Issue 12(2022)
• Page Start: 826
• Page End: 833
• Publication Date: 2022-12-01
• Subjects: deep learning -- parallel imaging -- simultaneous multislice acceleration -- knee MRI; Diagnosis, Radioscopic -- Periodicals; Radiology, Medical -- Periodicals; 616.0757
• DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000900
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-9996

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: This study aimed to examine various combinations of parallel imaging (PI) and simultaneous multislice (SMS) acceleration imaging using deep learning (DL)-enhanced and conventional reconstruction. The study also aimed at comparing the diagnostic performance of the various combinations in internal knee derangement and provided a quantitative evaluation of image sharpness and noise using edge rise distance (ERD) and noise power (NP), respectively. Materials and Methods: The data from adult patients who underwent knee magnetic resonance imaging using various DL-enhanced acquisitions between June 2021 and January 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The participants underwent conventional 2-fold PI and DL protocols with 4- to 8-fold acceleration imaging (P2S2 [2-fold PI with 2-fold SMS], P3S2, and P4S2). Three readers evaluated the internal knee derangement and the overall image quality. The diagnostic performance was calculated using consensus reading as a standard reference, and we conducted comparative evaluations. We calculated the ERD and NP for quantitative evaluations of image sharpness and noise, respectively. Interreader and intermethod agreements were calculated using Fleiss κ. Results: A total of 33 patients (mean age, 49 ± 19 years; 20 women) were included in this study. The diagnostic performance for internal knee derangement and the overall image quality were similar among the evaluated protocols. The NP values were significantly lower using the DL protocols than with conventional imaging ( P < 0.001), whereas the ERD values were similar among these methods ( P > 0.12). Interreader and intermethod agreements were moderate-to-excellent (κ = 0.574–0.838) and good-to-excellent (κ = 0.755–1.000), respectively. In addition, the mean acquisition time was reduced by 47% when using DL with P2S2, by 62% with P3S2, and by 71% with P4S2, compared with conventional P2 imaging (2 minutes and 55 seconds). Conclusions: The combined use of DL-enhanced 8-fold acceleration imaging (4-fold PI with 2-fold SMS) showed comparable performance with conventional 2-fold PI for the evaluation of internal knee derangement, with a 71% reduction in acquisition time.