Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35299005›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2022

Physics-informed neural networks for myocardial perfusion MRI quantification.

Rudolf L M van Herten, Amedeo Chiribiri, Marcel Breeuwer, Mitko Veta, Cian M Scannell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance expert consensus statement on quantitative myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Rudolf L M van HertenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Medical Image Analysis group, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Amedeo ChiribiriSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, United Kingdom.
Marcel BreeuwerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Medical Image Analysis group, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherlands.
Mitko VetaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Medical Image Analysis group, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Cian M ScannellSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: cian.scannell@kcl.ac.uk.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 203148/Z/16/ZWellcome Trust 222678/Z/21/ZWellcome Trust WT 203148/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tracer-kinetic models allow for the quantification of kinetic parameters such as blood flow from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) images. Fitting the observed data with multi-compartment exchange models is desirable, as they are physiologically plausible and resolve directly for blood flow and microvascular function. However, the reliability of model fitting is limited by the low signal-to-noise ratio, temporal resolution, and acquisition length. This may result in inaccurate parameter estimates. This study introduces physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) as a means to perform myocardial perfusion MR quantification, which provides a versatile scheme for the inference of kinetic parameters. These neural networks can be trained to fit the observed perfusion MR data while respecting the underlying physical conservation laws described by a multi-compartment exchange model. Here, we provide a framework for the implementation of PINNs in myocardial perfusion MR. The approach is validated both in silico and in vivo. In the in silico study, an overall decrease in mean-squared error with the ground-truth parameters was observed compared to a standard non-linear least squares fitting approach. The in vivo study demonstrates that the method produces parameter values comparable to those previously found in literature, as well as providing parameter maps which match the clinical diagnosis of patients.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaMagnetic Resonance ImagingHumansNeural Networks, ComputerPerfusionPhysicsReproducibility of ResultsContrast MediaMyocardial perfusion MRIPhysics informed neural networksSmall dataTracer-kinetic modelling

Identifiers

PMID35299005
PMCPMC9051528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.