Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Automated image quality assessment for selecting among multiple magnetic resonance image acquisitions in the German National Cohort study.
Schuppert, Christopher; Rospleszcz, Susanne; Hirsch, Jochen G; Hoinkiss, Daniel C; Köhn, Alexander; von Krüchten, Ricarda; Russe, Maximilian F; Keil, Thomas; Krist, Lilian; Schmidt, Börge; Michels, Karin B; Schipf, Sabine; Brenner, Hermann; Kröncke, Thomas J; Pischon, Tobias; Niendorf, Thoralf; Schulz-Menger, Jeanette; Forsting, Michael; Völzke, Henry; Hosten, Norbert; Bülow, Robin; Zaitsev, Maxim; Kauczor, Hans-Ulrich; Bamberg, Fabian; Günther, Matthias; Schlett, Christopher L.
Affiliation
  • Schuppert C; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
  • Rospleszcz S; Chair of Epidemiology, Institute of Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig Maximilians University, Faculty of Medicine, Munich, Germany.
  • Hirsch JG; Institute of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany.
  • Hoinkiss DC; German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany.
  • Köhn A; Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine MEVIS, Bremen, Germany.
  • von Krüchten R; Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine MEVIS, Bremen, Germany.
  • Russe MF; Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine MEVIS, Bremen, Germany.
  • Keil T; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
  • Krist L; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
  • Schmidt B; Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
  • Michels KB; Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
  • Schipf S; State Institute of Health, Bavarian Health and Food Safety Authority, Erlangen, Germany.
  • Brenner H; Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
  • Kröncke TJ; Institute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
  • Pischon T; Institute for Prevention and Cancer Epidemiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
  • Niendorf T; Institute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
  • Schulz-Menger J; Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
  • Forsting M; Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany.
  • Völzke H; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Augsburg, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
  • Hosten N; Molecular Epidemiology Research Group, Max-Delbrueck-Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association (MDC), Berlin, Germany.
  • Bülow R; Biobank Technology Platform, Max-Delbrueck-Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association (MDC), Berlin, Germany.
  • Zaitsev M; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
  • Kauczor HU; Berlin Ultrahigh Field Facility (B.U.F.F.), Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association (MDC), Berlin, Germany.
  • Bamberg F; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
  • Günther M; German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
  • Schlett CL; Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, HELIOS Hospital Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany.
Sci Rep ; 13(1): 22745, 2023 12 20.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38123791
ABSTRACT
In magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the perception of substandard image quality may prompt repetition of the respective image acquisition protocol. Subsequently selecting the preferred high-quality image data from a series of acquisitions can be challenging. An automated workflow may facilitate and improve this selection. We therefore aimed to investigate the applicability of an automated image quality assessment for the prediction of the subjectively preferred image acquisition. Our analysis included data from 11,347 participants with whole-body MRI examinations performed as part of the ongoing prospective multi-center German National Cohort (NAKO) study. Trained radiologic technologists repeated any of the twelve examination protocols due to induced setup errors and/or subjectively unsatisfactory image quality and chose a preferred acquisition from the resultant series. Up to 11 quantitative image quality parameters were automatically derived from all acquisitions. Regularized regression and standard estimates of diagnostic accuracy were calculated. Controlling for setup variations in 2342 series of two or more acquisitions, technologists preferred the repetition over the initial acquisition in 1116 of 1396 series in which the initial setup was retained (79.9%, range across protocols 73-100%). Image quality parameters then commonly showed statistically significant differences between chosen and discarded acquisitions. In regularized regression across all protocols, 'structured noise maximum' was the strongest predictor for the technologists' choice, followed by 'N/2 ghosting average'. Combinations of the automatically derived parameters provided an area under the ROC curve between 0.51 and 0.74 for the prediction of the technologists' choice. It is concluded that automated image quality assessment can, despite considerable performance differences between protocols and anatomical regions, contribute substantially to identifying the subjective preference in a series of MRI acquisitions and thus provide effective decision support to readers.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Sci Rep Year: 2023 Type: Article Affiliation country: Germany

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Sci Rep Year: 2023 Type: Article Affiliation country: Germany