Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33120371›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2020

Comparison of deep learning synthesis of synthetic CTs using clinical MRI inputs.

Haley A Massa, Jacob M Johnson, Alan B McMillan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Deep learning in MRI-guided radiation therapy: A systematic review.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Haley A MassaDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.
Jacob M JohnsonDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.
Alan B McMillanDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.

Funding

Improved Techniques for Substitute CT Generation from MRI datasetsR01EB026708 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI MCMILLAN, ALAN BLAIR · 2018 to 2021
$1.8M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB026708
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been substantial interest in developing techniques for synthesizing CT-like images from MRI inputs, with important applications in simultaneous PET/MR and radiotherapy planning. Deep learning has recently shown great potential for solving this problem. The goal of this research was to investigate the capability of four common clinical MRI sequences (T1-weighted gradient-echo [T1], T2-weighted fat-suppressed fast spin-echo [T2-FatSat], post-contrast T1-weighted gradient-echo [T1-Post], and fast spin-echo T2-weighted fluid-attenuated inversion recovery [CUBE-FLAIR]) as inputs into a deep CT synthesis pipeline. Data were obtained retrospectively in 92 subjects who had undergone an MRI and CT scan on the same day. The patient's MR and CT scans were registered to one another using affine registration. The deep learning model was a convolutional neural network encoder-decoder with skip connections similar to the U-net architecture and Inception V3 inspired blocks instead of sequential convolution blocks. After training with 150 epochs and a batch size of 6, the model was evaluated using structural similarity index (SSIM), peak SNR (PSNR), mean absolute error (MAE), and dice coefficient. We found that feasible results were attainable for each image type, and no single image type was superior for all analyses. The MAE (in HU) of the resulting synthesized CT in the whole brain was 51.236 ± 4.504 for CUBE-FLAIR, 45.432 ± 8.517 for T1, 44.558 ± 7.478 for T1-Post, and 45.721 ± 8.7767 for T2, showing not only feasible, but also very compelling results on clinical images. Deep learning-based synthesis of CT images from MRI is possible with a wide range of inputs, suggesting that viable images can be created from a wide range of clinical input types.

Indexed as

Deep LearningNeural Networks, ComputerBrain NeoplasmsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID33120371
PMCPMC8162064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.