Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39969553›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2025

The scientific evidence of commercial AI products for MRI acceleration: a systematic review.

Stefan J Fransen, Christian Roest, Frank F J Simonis, Derya Yakar, Thomas C Kwee

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Advances in cartilage imaging techniques.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Stefan J FransenDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. s.j.fransen@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5454-5052
Christian RoestDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Frank F J SimonisTechMed Centre, Technical University Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Derya YakarDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Thomas C KweeDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

Health~Holland and Siemens Healthineers LSHM20103
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study explores the methods employed by commercially available AI products to accelerate MRI protocols and investigates the strength of their diagnostic image quality assessment. MATERIALS AND

methodsAll commercial AI products for MRI acceleration were identified from the exhibitors presented at the RSNA 2023 and ECR 2024 annual meetings. Peer-reviewed scientific articles describing validation of clinical performance were searched for each product. Information was extracted regarding the MRI acceleration technique, achieved acceleration, diagnostic performance metrics, test cohort, and hallucinatory artifacts. The strength of the diagnostic image quality was assessed using scientific evidence levels ranging from "product's technical feasibility for clinical purposes" to "product's economic impact on society".

resultsOut of 1046 companies, 14 products of 14 companies were included. No scientific articles were found for four products (29%). For the remaining ten products (71%), 21 articles were retrieved. Four acceleration methods were identified: noise reduction, raw data reconstruction, personalized scanning protocols, and synthetic image generation. Only a limited number of articles prospectively demonstrated impact on patient outcomes (n = 4, 19%), and no articles discussed an evaluation in a prospective cohort of > 100 patients or performed an economic analysis. None of the articles performed an analysis of hallucinatory artifacts.

conclusionCurrently, commercially available AI products for MRI acceleration can be categorized into four main methods. The acceleration methods lack prospective scientific evidence on clinical performance in large cohorts and economic analysis, which would help to get a better insight into their diagnostic performance and enable safe and effective clinical implementation. KEY POINTS: Question There is a growing interest in AI products that reduce MRI scan time, but an overview of these methods and their scientific evidence is missing. Findings Only a limited number of articles (n = 4, 19%) prospectively demonstrated the impact of the software for accelerating MRI on diagnostic performance metrics. Clinical relevance Although various commercially available products shorten MRI acquisition time, more studies in large cohorts are needed to get a better insight into the diagnostic performance of AI-constructed MRI.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingArtifactsHumansAccelerationArtificial intelligenceEvidence-based practiceMagnetic resonance imagingRadiology

Identifiers

PMID39969553
PMCPMC12226642

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.