ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2022
HFP-QSMGAN: QSM from homodyne-filtered phase images.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- HFP-QSMGAN: QSM from homodyne-filtered phase images.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHomodyne filtering is a standard preprocessing step in the estimation of SWI. Unfortunately, SWI is not quantitative, and QSM cannot be accurately estimated from filtered phase images. Compared with gradient-echo sequences suitable for computing QSM, SWI is more readily available and is often the only susceptibility-sensitive sequence acquired in the clinical setting. In this project, we aimed to quantify susceptibility from the homodyne-filtered phase (HFP), acquired for computing susceptibility-weighted images, using convolutional neural networks to solve the compounded problem of (1) computing the solution to the inverse dipole problem, and (2) compensating for the effects of the homodyne filtering.
methodsTwo convolutional neural networks, the U-Net and a modified QSMGAN architecture (HFP-QSMGAN), were trained to predict QSM maps at different TEs from HFP images. The QSM maps were quantified from a gradient-echo sequence acquired in the same individuals using total generalized variation (TGV)-QSM. The QSM maps estimated directly from the HFP were also included for comparison. Voxel-wise predictions and, importantly, regional predictions of susceptibility with adjustment to a reference region, were compared.
resultsOur results indicate that the U-Net model provides more accurate voxel-wise predictions of susceptibility compared with HFP-QSMGAN and HFP-QSM. However, regional estimates of susceptibility predicted by HFP-QSMGAN are more strongly correlated with the values from TGV-QSM compared with those of U-Net and HFP-QSM.
conclusionAccurate prediction of susceptibility can be achieved from filtered SWI phase using convolutional neural networks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.