Evaluation of a Deep Learning Reconstruction for High-Quality T2-Weighted Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Deep learning (DL) reconstruction techniques to improve MR image quality are becoming commercially available with the hope that they will be applicable to multiple imaging application sites and acquisition protocols. However, before clinical implementation, these methods must be validated for specific use cases. In this work, the quality of standard-of-care (SOC) T2w and a high-spatial-resolution (HR) imaging of the breast were assessed both with and without prototype DL reconstruction. Studies were performed using data collected from phantoms, 20 retrospectively collected SOC patient exams, and 56 prospectively acquired SOC and HR patient exams. Image quality was quantitatively assessed via signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and edge sharpness. Qualitatively, all in vivo images were scored by either two or four radiologist readers using 5-point Likert scales in the following categories: artifacts, perceived sharpness, perceived SNR, and overall quality. Differences in reader scores were tested for significance. Reader preference and perception of signal intensity changes were also assessed. Application of the DL resulted in higher average SNR (1.2-2.8 times), CNR (1.0-1.8 times), and image sharpness (1.2-1.7 times). Qualitatively, the SOC acquisition with DL resulted in significantly improved image quality scores in all categories compared to non-DL images. HR acquisition with DL significantly increased SNR, sharpness, and overall quality compared to both the non-DL SOC and the non-DL HR images. The acquisition time for the HR data only required a 20% increase compared to the SOC acquisition and readers typically preferred DL images over non-DL counterparts. Overall, the DL reconstruction demonstrated improved T2w image quality in clinical breast MRI.

Automated Placement of Scan and Pre-Scan Volumes for Breast MRI Using a Convolutional Neural Network.

Graphically prescribed patient-specific imaging volumes and local pre-scan volumes are routinely placed by MRI technologists to optimize image quality. However, manual placement of these volumes by MR technologists is time-consuming, tedious, and subject to intra- and inter-operator variability. Resolving these bottlenecks is critical with the rise in abbreviated breast MRI exams for screening purposes. This work proposes an automated approach for the placement of scan and pre-scan volumes for breast MRI. Anatomic 3-plane scout image series and associated scan volumes were retrospectively collected from 333 clinical breast exams acquired on 10 individual MRI scanners. Bilateral pre-scan volumes were also generated and reviewed in consensus by three MR physicists. A deep convolutional neural network was trained to predict both the scan and pre-scan volumes from the 3-plane scout images. The agreement between the network-predicted volumes and the clinical scan volumes or physicist-placed pre-scan volumes was evaluated using the intersection over union, the absolute distance between volume centers, and the difference in volume sizes. The scan volume model achieved a median 3D intersection over union of 0.69. The median error in scan volume location was 2.7 cm and the median size error was 2%. The median 3D intersection over union for the pre-scan placement was 0.68 with no significant difference in mean value between the left and right pre-scan volumes. The median error in the pre-scan volume location was 1.3 cm and the median size error was -2%. The average estimated uncertainty in positioning or volume size for both models ranged from 0.2 to 3.4 cm. Overall, this work demonstrates the feasibility of an automated approach for the placement of scan and pre-scan volumes based on a neural network model.

Gadolinium-based contrast agent attenuation does not impact PET quantification in simultaneous dynamic contrast enhanced breast PET/MR.

PURPOSE: Simultaneous PET/MR imaging involves injection of a radiopharmaceutical and often also includes administration of a gadolinium-based contrast agent (GBCA). Phantom model studies indicate that attenuation of annihilation photons by GBCAs does not bias quantification metrics of PET radiopharmaceutical uptake. However, a direct comparison of attenuation-corrected PET values before and after administration of GBCA has not been performed in patients imaged with simultaneous dynamic PET/MR. The purpose of this study was to investigate the attenuating effect of GBCAs on standardized uptake value (SUV) quantification of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in invasive breast cancer and normal tissues using simultaneous PET/MR. METHODS: The study included 13 women with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer imaged using simultaneous dedicated prone breast PET/MR with FDG. PET data collection and two-point Dixon-based MR attenuation correction sequences began simultaneously before the administration of GBCA to avoid a potential impact of GBCA on the attenuation correction map. A standard clinical dose of GBCA was intravenously administered for the dynamic contrast enhanced MR sequences obtained during the simultaneous PET data acquisition. PET data were dynamically reconstructed into 60 frames of 30 s each. Three timing windows were chosen consisting of a single frame (30 s), two frames (60 s), or four frames (120 s) immediately before and after contrast administration. SUVmax and SUVmean of the biopsy-proven breast malignancy, fibroglandular tissue of the contralateral normal breast, descending aorta, and liver were calculated prior to and following GBCA administration. Percent change in the SUV metrics were calculated to test for a statistically significant, non-zero percent change using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS: No statistical change in SUVmax or SUVmean was found for the breast malignancies or normal anatomical regions during the timing windows before and after GBCA administration. CONCLUSIONS: GBCAs do not significantly impact the results of PET quantification by means of additional attenuation. However, GBCAs may still affect quantification by affecting MR acquisitions used for MR-based attenuation correction which this study did not address. Corrections to account for attenuation due to clinical concentrations of GBCAs are not necessary in simultaneous PET/MR examinations when MR-based attenuation correction sequences are performed prior to GBCA administration.