Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41035253›Full record

ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2026

Real-Time Deep-Learning Image Reconstruction and Instrument Tracking in MR-Guided Biopsies.

Constant R Noordman, Lauren P W Te Molder, Marnix C Maas, Christiaan G Overduin, Jurgen J Fütterer, Henkjan J Huisman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Constant R NoordmanDiagnostic Image Analysis Group, Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4358-0087
Lauren P W Te MolderMinimally Invasive Image-Guided Intervention Center, Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Marnix C MaasDepartment of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Christiaan G OverduinMinimally Invasive Image-Guided Intervention Center, Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jurgen J FüttererMinimally Invasive Image-Guided Intervention Center, Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Henkjan J HuismanDiagnostic Image Analysis Group, Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Funding

Health~Holland LSHM20103
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransrectal in-bore MR-guided biopsy (MRGB) is accurate but time-consuming, limiting clinical throughput. Faster imaging could improve workflow and enable real-time instrument tracking. Existing acceleration methods often use simulated data and lack validation in clinical settings. PURPOSE: To accelerate MRGB by using deep learning for undersampled image reconstruction and instrument tracking, trained on multi-slice MR DICOM images and evaluated on raw k-space acquisitions. STUDY TYPE: Prospective feasibility study. POPULATION: Briefly, 1289 male patients (aged 44-87, median age 68) for model training, 8 male patients (aged 59-78, median age 65) for prospective feasibility testing. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 2D Cartesian balanced steady-state free precession, 3 T. ASSESSMENT: Segmentation and reconstruction models were trained on 8464 MRGB confirmation scans containing a biopsy needle guide instrument and evaluated on 10 prospectively acquired dynamic k-space samples. Needle guide tracking accuracy was assessed using instrument tip prediction (ITP) error, computed per frame as the Euclidean distance from reference positions defined via pre- and post-movement scans. Feasibility was measured by the proportion of frames with < 5 mm error. Additional experiments tested model robustness under increasing undersampling rates. STATISTICAL TESTS: In a segmentation validation experiment, a one-sample t-test tested if the mean ITP error was below 5 mm. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. In the tracking experiments, the mean, standard deviation, and Wilson 95% CI of the ITP success rate were computed per sample, across undersampling levels.

resultsITP was first evaluated independently on 201 fully sampled scans, yielding an ITP error of 1.55 ± 1.01 mm (95% CI: 1.41-1.69). Tracking performance was assessed across increasing undersampling factors, achieving high ITP success rates from 97.5% ± 5.8% (68.8%-99.9%) at 8× up to 92.5% ± 10.3% (62.5%-98.9%) at 16× undersampling. Performance declined at 18×, dropping to 74.6% ± 33.6% (43.8%-91.7%). DATA

conclusionResults confirm stable needle guide tip prediction accuracy and support the robustness of the reconstruction model for tracking at high undersampling. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 2. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImage-Guided BiopsyImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsFeasibility StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesReproducibility of Resultsartificial intelligencedeep learningimage processing (computer‐assisted)interventional radiologymagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID41035253
PMCPMC12810995

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.