ArticleEuropean radiology2026
Deep learning-based segmentation of T1 and T2 cardiac MRI maps for automated disease detection.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Imaging: From Automated Acquisition to Precision Diagnostics and Clinical Decision Support.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Assessing the robustness of an artificial intelligence segmentation model for quantitative cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging across cardiac phenotypes.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesParametric tissue mapping enables quantitative cardiac tissue characterization but is limited by inter-observer variability during manual delineation. Traditional approaches relying on average relaxation values and single cutoffs may oversimplify myocardial complexity. This study evaluates whether deep learning (DL) can achieve segmentation accuracy comparable to inter-observer agreement, explores the utility of statistical features beyond mean T1/T2 values, and assesses whether machine learning (ML) combining multiple intensity-based statistical features enhances disease detection. MATERIALS AND
methodsT1 and T2 maps were manually segmented. The test subset was independently annotated by two observers, and inter-observer variability was assessed. A DL model was trained to segment the left-ventricular blood pool and myocardium. Average (A), lower quartile (LQ), median (M), and upper quartile (UQ) were computed for the myocardial pixels and employed in classification by applying cutoffs or in ML. Dice similarity coefficient (DICE) and mean absolute percentage error evaluated segmentation performance. Bland-Altman plots assessed inter-user and model-observer agreement. Receiver operating characteristic analysis determined optimal cutoffs. Pearson correlation compared features from model and manual segmentations. F1-score, precision, and recall evaluated classification performance. Wilcoxon test assessed differences between classification methods, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
results144 subjects (mean age 42.2 years ± 16.1, 76 men) were split into training (100), validation (15) and evaluation (29) subsets. Segmentation model achieved a DICE of 85.4%, surpassing inter-observer agreement. Random forest applied to all features increased F1-score (92.7%, p < 0.001).
conclusionDL facilitates segmentation of T1/ T2 maps. Combining multiple features with ML improves disease detection. KEY POINTS: Question Manual segmentation of myocardial T1/T2 maps is time-consuming and affected by inter-observer variability; relying on single cutoff values for diagnosis may oversimplify myocardial complexity. Findings Deep learning achieves segmentation accuracy within inter-observer agreement, while machine learning improves disease detection compared to singular cutoffs. Clinical relevance Automated segmentation and feature extraction from T1/T2 maps can enhance workflow efficiency, reduce inter-observer variability, and improve diagnostic consistency. The high recall of the machine learning model minimizes missed diagnoses, ensuring more reliable disease detection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41174040What 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.