Search

Purpose: To compare the performance of lesion detection and Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) classification between a deep learning-based algorithm (DLA), clinical reports and radiologists with different levels of experience in prostate MRI., Methods: This retrospective study included 121 patients who underwent prebiopsy MRI and prostate biopsy. More than five radiologists (Reader groups 1, 2: residents; Readers 3, 4: less-experienced radiologists; Reader 5: expert) independently reviewed biparametric MRI (bpMRI). The DLA results were obtained using bpMRI. The reference standard was based on pathologic reports. The diagnostic performance of the PI-RADS classification of DLA, clinical reports, and radiologists was analyzed using AUROC. Dichotomous analysis (PI-RADS cutoff value ≥ 3 or 4) was performed, and the sensitivities and specificities were compared using McNemar's test., Results: Clinically significant cancer [CSC, Gleason score ≥ 7] was confirmed in 43 patients (35.5%). The AUROC of the DLA (0.828) for diagnosing CSC was significantly higher than that of Reader 1 (AUROC, 0.706; p = 0.011), significantly lower than that of Reader 5 (AUROC, 0.914; p = 0.013), and similar to clinical reports and other readers (p = 0.060-0.661). The sensitivity of DLA (76.7%) was comparable to those of all readers and the clinical reports at a PI-RADS cutoff value ≥ 4. The specificity of the DLA (85.9%) was significantly higher than those of clinical reports and Readers 2-3 and comparable to all others at a PI-RADS cutoff value ≥ 4., Conclusions: The DLA showed moderate diagnostic performance at a level between those of residents and an expert in detecting and classifying according to PI-RADS. The performance of DLA was similar to that of clinical reports from various radiologists in clinical practice., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate potential confounding factors in the quantitative assessment of liver fibrosis and cirrhosis using T1 relaxation times., Methods: The study population is based on a radiology-information-system database search for abdominal MRI performed from July 2018 to April 2019 at our institution. After applying exclusion criteria 200 (59 ± 16 yrs) remaining patients were retrospectively included. 93 patients were defined as liver-healthy, 40 patients without known fibrosis or cirrhosis, and 67 subjects had a clinically or biopsy-proven liver fibrosis or cirrhosis. T1 mapping was performed using a slice based look-locker approach. A ROI based analysis of the left and the right liver was performed. Fat fraction, R2*, liver volume, laboratory parameters, sex, and age were evaluated as potential confounding factors., Results: T1 values were significantly lower in healthy subjects without known fibrotic changes (1.5 T MRI: 575 ± 56 ms; 3 T MRI: 857 ± 128 ms) compared to patients with acute liver disease (1.5 T MRI: 657 ± 73 ms, p < 0.0001; 3 T MRI: 952 ± 37 ms, p = 0.028) or known fibrosis or cirrhosis (1.5 T MRI: 644 ± 83 ms, p < 0.0001; 3 T MRI: 995 ± 150 ms, p = 0.018). T1 values correlated moderately with the Child-Pugh stage at 1.5 T (p = 0.01, ρ = 0.35)., Conclusion: T1 mapping is a capable predictor for detection of liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. Especially age is not a confounding factor and, hence, age-independent thresholds can be defined. Acute liver diseases are confounding factors and should be ruled out before employing T1-relaxometry based thresholds to screen for patients with liver fibrosis or cirrhosis., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) based software solution tested on liver volumetric analyses and to compare the results to the manual contour segmentation., Materials and Methods: We retrospectively obtained 462 multiphasic CT datasets with six series for each patient: three different contrast phases and two slice thickness reconstructions (1.5/5 mm), totaling 2772 series. AI-based liver volumes were determined using multi-scale deep-reinforcement learning for 3D body markers detection and 3D structure segmentation. The algorithm was trained for liver volumetry on approximately 5000 datasets. We computed the absolute error of each automatically- and manually-derived volume relative to the mean manual volume. The mean processing time/dataset and method was recorded. Variations of liver volumes were compared using univariate generalized linear model analyses. A subgroup of 60 datasets was manually segmented by three radiologists, with a further subgroup of 20 segmented three times by each, to compare the automatically-derived results with the ground-truth., Results: The mean absolute error of the automatically-derived measurement was 44.3 mL (representing 2.37 % of the averaged liver volumes). The liver volume was neither dependent on the contrast phase (p = 0.697), nor on the slice thickness (p = 0.446). The mean processing time/dataset with the algorithm was 9.94 s (sec) compared to manual segmentation with 219.34 s. We found an excellent agreement between both approaches with an ICC value of 0.996., Conclusion: The results of our study demonstrate that AI-powered fully automated liver volumetric analyses can be done with excellent accuracy, reproducibility, robustness, speed and agreement with the manual segmentation., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)