Diagnostic Image Quality of a Low-Field (0.55T) Knee MRI Protocol Using Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Compared with a Standard (1.5T) Knee MRI Protocol
Objectives: Low-field MRI at 0.55 Tesla (T) with deep learning image reconstruction has recently become commercially available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the image quality and diagnostic reliability of knee MRI performed at 0.55T compared with 1.5T. Methods: A total of 20 volunteer...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-02-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Clinical Medicine |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/12/5/1916 |
| _version_ | 1797615039683756032 |
|---|---|
| author | Ingo Lopez Schmidt Nina Haag Iram Shahzadi Lynn Johann Frohwein Claus Schneider Julius Henning Niehoff Jan Robert Kroeger Jan Borggrefe Christoph Moenninghoff |
| author_facet | Ingo Lopez Schmidt Nina Haag Iram Shahzadi Lynn Johann Frohwein Claus Schneider Julius Henning Niehoff Jan Robert Kroeger Jan Borggrefe Christoph Moenninghoff |
| author_sort | Ingo Lopez Schmidt |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objectives: Low-field MRI at 0.55 Tesla (T) with deep learning image reconstruction has recently become commercially available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the image quality and diagnostic reliability of knee MRI performed at 0.55T compared with 1.5T. Methods: A total of 20 volunteers (9 female, 11 male; mean age = 42 years) underwent knee MRI on a 0.55T system (MAGNETOM Free.Max, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany; 12-channel Contour M Coil) and a 1.5T scanner (MAGNETOM Sola, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany; 18-channel transmit/receive knee coil). Standard two-dimensional (2D) turbo spin echo (TSE), fat-suppressed (fs) proton density-weighted (PDw), T1w TSE, and T2w TSE sequences were acquired in approximately 15 min. In total, 2 radiologists blinded to the field strength subjectively assessed all MRI sequences (overall image quality, image noise, and diagnostic quality) using a 5-point Likert scale (1–5; 5 = best). Additionally, both radiologists evaluated the possible pathologies of menisci, ligaments, and cartilage. Contrast ratios (CRs) of different tissues (bone, cartilage, and menisci) were determined on coronal PDw fs TSE images. The statistical analysis included Cohen’s kappa and the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Results: The overall image quality of the 0.55T T2w, T1w, and PDw fs TSE sequences was diagnostic and rated similar for T1w (<i>p</i> > 0.05), but lower for PDw fs TSE and T2w TSE compared with 1.5T (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The diagnostic accordance of meniscal and cartilage pathologies at 0.55T was similar to 1.5T. The CRs of the tissues were not significantly different between 1.5T and 0.55T (<i>p</i> > 0.05). The inter-observer agreement of the subjective image quality was generally fair between both readers and almost perfect for the pathologies. Conclusions: Deep learning-reconstructed TSE imaging at 0.55T yielded diagnostic image quality for knee MRI compared with standard 1.5T MRI. The diagnostic performance of meniscal and cartilage pathologies was equal for 0.55T and 1.5T without a significant loss of diagnostic information. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T07:20:49Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-af0e58c7bce44be5b11b7509730950f5 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2077-0383 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T07:20:49Z |
| publishDate | 2023-02-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Clinical Medicine |
| spelling | doaj.art-af0e58c7bce44be5b11b7509730950f52023-11-17T08:00:06ZengMDPI AGJournal of Clinical Medicine2077-03832023-02-01125191610.3390/jcm12051916Diagnostic Image Quality of a Low-Field (0.55T) Knee MRI Protocol Using Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Compared with a Standard (1.5T) Knee MRI ProtocolIngo Lopez Schmidt0Nina Haag1Iram Shahzadi2Lynn Johann Frohwein3Claus Schneider4Julius Henning Niehoff5Jan Robert Kroeger6Jan Borggrefe7Christoph Moenninghoff8Department of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 32429 Minden, GermanyDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 32429 Minden, GermanyDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 32429 Minden, GermanySiemens Healthcare, GmbH, 91052 Erlangen, GermanyDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 32429 Minden, GermanyDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 32429 Minden, GermanyDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 32429 Minden, GermanyDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 32429 Minden, GermanyDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, 32429 Minden, GermanyObjectives: Low-field MRI at 0.55 Tesla (T) with deep learning image reconstruction has recently become commercially available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the image quality and diagnostic reliability of knee MRI performed at 0.55T compared with 1.5T. Methods: A total of 20 volunteers (9 female, 11 male; mean age = 42 years) underwent knee MRI on a 0.55T system (MAGNETOM Free.Max, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany; 12-channel Contour M Coil) and a 1.5T scanner (MAGNETOM Sola, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany; 18-channel transmit/receive knee coil). Standard two-dimensional (2D) turbo spin echo (TSE), fat-suppressed (fs) proton density-weighted (PDw), T1w TSE, and T2w TSE sequences were acquired in approximately 15 min. In total, 2 radiologists blinded to the field strength subjectively assessed all MRI sequences (overall image quality, image noise, and diagnostic quality) using a 5-point Likert scale (1–5; 5 = best). Additionally, both radiologists evaluated the possible pathologies of menisci, ligaments, and cartilage. Contrast ratios (CRs) of different tissues (bone, cartilage, and menisci) were determined on coronal PDw fs TSE images. The statistical analysis included Cohen’s kappa and the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Results: The overall image quality of the 0.55T T2w, T1w, and PDw fs TSE sequences was diagnostic and rated similar for T1w (<i>p</i> > 0.05), but lower for PDw fs TSE and T2w TSE compared with 1.5T (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The diagnostic accordance of meniscal and cartilage pathologies at 0.55T was similar to 1.5T. The CRs of the tissues were not significantly different between 1.5T and 0.55T (<i>p</i> > 0.05). The inter-observer agreement of the subjective image quality was generally fair between both readers and almost perfect for the pathologies. Conclusions: Deep learning-reconstructed TSE imaging at 0.55T yielded diagnostic image quality for knee MRI compared with standard 1.5T MRI. The diagnostic performance of meniscal and cartilage pathologies was equal for 0.55T and 1.5T without a significant loss of diagnostic information.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/12/5/1916magnetic resonance imagingdeep learning reconstructionlow-field MRIkneediagnostic imaging |
| spellingShingle | Ingo Lopez Schmidt Nina Haag Iram Shahzadi Lynn Johann Frohwein Claus Schneider Julius Henning Niehoff Jan Robert Kroeger Jan Borggrefe Christoph Moenninghoff Diagnostic Image Quality of a Low-Field (0.55T) Knee MRI Protocol Using Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Compared with a Standard (1.5T) Knee MRI Protocol Journal of Clinical Medicine magnetic resonance imaging deep learning reconstruction low-field MRI knee diagnostic imaging |
| title | Diagnostic Image Quality of a Low-Field (0.55T) Knee MRI Protocol Using Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Compared with a Standard (1.5T) Knee MRI Protocol |
| title_full | Diagnostic Image Quality of a Low-Field (0.55T) Knee MRI Protocol Using Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Compared with a Standard (1.5T) Knee MRI Protocol |
| title_fullStr | Diagnostic Image Quality of a Low-Field (0.55T) Knee MRI Protocol Using Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Compared with a Standard (1.5T) Knee MRI Protocol |
| title_full_unstemmed | Diagnostic Image Quality of a Low-Field (0.55T) Knee MRI Protocol Using Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Compared with a Standard (1.5T) Knee MRI Protocol |
| title_short | Diagnostic Image Quality of a Low-Field (0.55T) Knee MRI Protocol Using Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Compared with a Standard (1.5T) Knee MRI Protocol |
| title_sort | diagnostic image quality of a low field 0 55t knee mri protocol using deep learning image reconstruction compared with a standard 1 5t knee mri protocol |
| topic | magnetic resonance imaging deep learning reconstruction low-field MRI knee diagnostic imaging |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/12/5/1916 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ingolopezschmidt diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol AT ninahaag diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol AT iramshahzadi diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol AT lynnjohannfrohwein diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol AT clausschneider diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol AT juliushenningniehoff diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol AT janrobertkroeger diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol AT janborggrefe diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol AT christophmoenninghoff diagnosticimagequalityofalowfield055tkneemriprotocolusingdeeplearningimagereconstructioncomparedwithastandard15tkneemriprotocol |