Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35175379›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2022

Fully automated intracardiac 4D flow MRI post-processing using deep learning for biventricular segmentation.

Philip A Corrado, Andrew L Wentland, Jitka Starekova, Archana Dhyani, Kara N Goss, Oliver Wieben

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Deep learning based automated left ventricle segmentation and flow quantification in 4D flow cardiac MRI.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. On the Analyses of Medical Images Using Traditional Machine Learning Techniques and Convolutional Neural Networks.Archives of computational methods in engineering : state of the art reviews · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Philip A CorradoUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA. pcorrado2@wisc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1510-8247
Andrew L WentlandUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
Jitka StarekovaUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
Archana DhyaniUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
Kara N GossUT Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.
Oliver WiebenUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USSouthwestern Medical Center

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectives4D flow MRI allows for a comprehensive assessment of intracardiac blood flow, useful for assessing cardiovascular diseases, but post-processing requires time-consuming ventricular segmentation throughout the cardiac cycle and is prone to subjective errors. Here, we evaluate the use of automatic left and right ventricular (LV and RV) segmentation based on deep learning (DL) network that operates on short-axis cine bSSFP images.

methodsA previously published DL network was fine-tuned via retraining on a local database of 106 subjects scanned at our institution. In 26 test subjects, the ventricles were segmented automatically by the network and manually by 3 human observers on bSSFP MRI. The bSSFP images were then registered to the corresponding 4D flow images to apply the segmentation to 4D flow velocity data. Dice coefficients and the relative deviation between measurements (automatic vs. manual and interobserver manual) of various hemodynamic parameters were assessed.

resultsThe automated segmentation resulted in similar Dice scores (LV: 0.92, RV: 0.86) and lower relative deviations from manual segmentation in left ventricular (LV) average kinetic energy (KE) (8%) and RV KE (15%) than the Dice scores (LV: 0.91, RV: 0.87) and relative deviations between manual segmentation observers (LV KE: 11%, p = 0.01; RV KE: 19%, p = 0.03).

conclusionsThe automated post-processing method using deep learning resulted in hemodynamic measurements that differ from a manual observer's measurements equally or less than the variation between manual observers. This approach can be used to decrease post-processing time on intraventricular 4D flow data and mitigate interobserver variability. KEY POINTS: • Our proposed method allows for fully automated post-processing of intraventricular 4D flow MRI data. • Our method resulted in hemodynamic measurements that matched those derived from manual segmentation equally as well as interobserver variability. • Our method can be used to greatly accelerate intraventricular 4D flow post-processing and improve interobserver repeatability.

Indexed as

Deep LearningHeartHeart VentriclesHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance Imaging, CineObserver VariationDeep learningHeart ventriclesHemodynamicsMagnetic resonance imagingObserver variation

Identifiers

PMID35175379
OpenAlexW4212848188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.