Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38902467›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2024

Deep learning reconstruction for lumbar spine MRI acceleration: a prospective study.

Hui Tang, Ming Hong, Lu Yu, Yang Song, Mengqiu Cao, Lei Xiang, Yan Zhou, Shiteng Suo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Clinical evaluation of deep learning accelerated lumbar T2-weighted and fat-suppressed MRI sequences.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors.

Hui Tang *Department of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Pudong New District, Shanghai, 200127, China.
Ming Hong *Department of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Pudong New District, Shanghai, 200127, China.
Lu YuDepartment of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Pudong New District, Shanghai, 200127, China.
Yang SongMR Research Collaboration Team, Siemens Healthineers Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Mengqiu CaoDepartment of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Pudong New District, Shanghai, 200127, China.
Lei XiangSubtle Medical, Shanghai, China.
Yan ZhouDepartment of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Pudong New District, Shanghai, 200127, China. zhouyan_1973@126.com.
Shiteng SuoDepartment of Radiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Pudong New District, Shanghai, 200127, China. shtsuo@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2528-2836

Funding

Leading Talent of Shanghai Municipal Health Commission 2022LJ023Renji Hospital RJKY23-004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) turbo spin-echo images reconstructed using a deep learning technique (TSE-DL) with standard turbo spin-echo (TSE-SD) images of the lumbar spine regarding image quality and detection performance of common degenerative pathologies.

methodsThis prospective, single-center study included 31 patients (15 males and 16 females; aged 51 ± 16 years (mean ± standard deviation)) who underwent lumbar spine exams with both TSE-SD and TSE-DL acquisitions for degenerative spine diseases. Images were analyzed by two radiologists and assessed for qualitative image quality using a 4-point Likert scale, quantitative signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of anatomic landmarks, and detection of common pathologies. Paired-sample t, Wilcoxon, and McNemar tests, unweighted/linearly weighted Cohen κ statistics, and intraclass correlation coefficients were used.

resultsScan time for TSE-DL and TSE-SD protocols was 2:55 and 5:17 min:s, respectively. The overall image quality was either significantly higher for TSE-DL or not significantly different between TSE-SD and TSE-DL. TSE-DL demonstrated higher SNR and subject noise scores than TSE-SD. For pathology detection, the interreader agreement was substantial to almost perfect for TSE-DL, with κ values ranging from 0.61 to 1.00; the interprotocol agreement was almost perfect for both readers, with κ values ranging from 0.84 to 1.00. There was no significant difference in the diagnostic confidence or detection rate of common pathologies between the two sequences (p ≥ 0.081).

conclusionsTSE-DL allowed for a 45% reduction in scan time over TSE-SD in lumbar spine MRI without compromising the overall image quality and showed comparable detection performance of common pathologies in the evaluation of degenerative lumbar spine changes. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Deep learning-reconstructed lumbar spine MRI protocol enabled a 45% reduction in scan time compared with conventional reconstruction, with comparable image quality and detection performance of common degenerative pathologies. KEY POINTS: • Lumbar spine MRI with deep learning reconstruction has broad application prospects. • Deep learning reconstruction of lumbar spine MRI saved 45% scan time without compromising overall image quality. • When compared with standard sequences, deep learning reconstruction showed similar detection performance of common degenerative lumbar spine pathologies.

Indexed as

Deep LearningLumbar VertebraeMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSignal-To-Noise RatioSpinal DiseasesArtificial intelligenceDeep learningLow back painLumbar vertebraeMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID38902467
PMCPMC11189847

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.