From Compressed-Sensing to Deep Learning MR: Comparative Biventricular Cardiac Function Analysis in a Patient Cohort.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Conventional segmented, retrospectively gated cine (Conv-cine) is challenged in patients with breath-hold difficulties. Compressed sensing (CS) has shown values in cine imaging but generally requires long reconstruction time. Recent artificial intelligence (AI) has demonstrated potential in fast cine imaging. PURPOSE: To compare CS-cine and AI-cine with Conv-cine in quantitative biventricular functions, image quality, and reconstruction time. STUDY TYPE Prospective human studies. SUBJECTS: 70 patients (age, 39 ± 15 years, 54.3% male). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE 3T; balanced steady state free precession gradient echo sequences. ASSESSMENT Biventricular functional parameters of CS-, AI-, and Conv-cine were measured by two radiologists independently and compared. The scan and reconstruction time were recorded. Subjective scores of image quality were compared by three radiologists. STATISTICAL TESTS Paired t-test and two related-samples Wilcoxon sign test were used to compare biventricular functional parameters between CS-, AI-, and Conv-cine. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman analysis, and Kendall's W method were applied to evaluate agreement of biventricular functional parameters and image quality of these three sequences. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant, and standardized mean difference (SMD) < 0. 100 was considered no significant difference. RESULTS: Compared to Conv-cine, no statistically significant differences were identified in CS- and AI-cine function results (all P > 0.05), except for very small differences in left ventricle end-diastole volumes of 2.5 mL (SMD = 0.082) and 4.1 mL (SMD = 0.096), respectively. Bland-Altman scatter plots revealed that biventricular function results were mostly distributed within the 95% confidence interval. All parameters had acceptable to excellent interobserver agreements (ICC 0.748-0.989). Compared with Conv-cine (84 ± 13 sec), both CS (14 ± 2 sec) and AI (15 ± 2 sec) techniques reduced scan time. Compared with CS-cine (304 ± 17 sec), AI-cine (24 ± 4 sec) reduced reconstruction time. CS-cine demonstrated significantly lower quality scores than Conv-cine, while AI-cine demonstrated similar scores (P = 0.634). CONCLUSION: CS- and AI-cine can achieve whole-heart cardiac cine imaging in a single breath-hold. Both CS- and AI-cine have the potential to supplement the gold standard Conv-cine in studying biventricular functions and benefit patients having difficulties with breath-holds. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE 1.