Patrick Quarterman1, Angela Lignelli2, Marc Lebel3, and Sachin Jambawalikar4
1GE Healthcare, New York, NY, United States, 2Radiology, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States, 3GE Healthcare, Calgary, AB, Canada, 4Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
Synopsis
The purpose of this study was to determine if
deep learning reconstruction (DLRecon) method to reduce image noise could lead
to improvement in in-vivo anatomical detail of the hippocampus structures
without substantial increase in scan/exam time on a clinical 3T system. Evaluation
of this new reconstruction technique was performed on a group of 5 volunteers
with results indicating that higher resolution scans compared to current
seizure protocol was free of imaging noise and led to higher confidence in
identifying hippocampal key anatomical structures and temporal lobes.
Purpose
Hippocampal
high-resolution imaging is critical in the evaluation of patient with mesial temporal,
localization related epilepsy, which is the most common type of epilepsy in adults.
Mesial temporal sclerosis is the most common anatomic findings in adults with
mesial temporal epilepsy identified on MR imaging by hyperintense T2 signal and
volume loss in the hippocampus. Early findings of mesial temporal sclerosis may
be subtle and are best evaluated on a 3T or higher strength magnet to obtain
highest signal to noise ratio. Higher signal to noise ratio to improve spatial
resolution comes at a cost of increased scan time- or increased field strength-
generally causing more patient motion artifact and discomfort and overall not
well tolerated.Method
In this study, we acquired FSE coronal T2, FSE
coronal T2 FLAIR and FSE axial IR sequences using current clinical voxel size
compared to higher resolution/ reduced voxel size in 5 volunteers. The study
was performed on, 3T 70cm bore MR scanners (Discovery MR750w, GE Healthcare,
USA) using GE Signa MRI Brain Array Coil (8 channels, High Resolution). Data
acquired with limited slice coverage through the anatomy of interest. Imaging parameters for deep-learning reconstruction
imaging data set described in table (fig. 1). were developed by the authors to produce resolution/voxel size that would greatly
improve visualization of the hippocamps compared to current seizure protocol
with conventional reconstruction. The sequences collected with current clinical
voxel size were reconstructed using conventional reconstruction method and the
higher resolution sequences were reconstructed with the DLRecon method for
removal of image noise.
The Deep-Learning Reconstruction (DLRecon) method comprised a deep
convolutional residual encoder network trained from a database of over 10,000
images to reconstruct images with high signal-to-noise ratio and high spatial
resolution. The network offered a tunable noise reduction factor to accommodate
user preference. The DLRecon network was embedded into a new reconstruction
pathway that operated in parallel with the conventional reconstruction such
that two sets of image series were generated from a single set of raw MR data.
All deep learning reconstruction
sequences used a 75% noise reduction calculation.Results
By employing the deep learning reconstruction
algorithm, an increase in spatial resolution resulted in significant
improvement in image quality allowing the detailed identification of
hippocampal formation structures on a 3T qualitatively approaching resolution
seen on a 7T magnet. This was achieved with minimal increase in scan time and
without subject discomfort. Discussion
Our results from this
abstract provide preliminary data on the use of DLRecon for improved
visualization of the hippocampus without significant scan time increases. Increasing resolution (voxel size) in most MR
sequences will improve visualization for anatomical structures when properly balanced
with correct level of signal-to-noise to provide an image free, as possible, of
noise. This proper balance of SNR
typically comes at the expense of increase scan time, SAR and likelihood of
patient motion (due to longer scan).
DLRecon has shown that the use of this reconstruction method combined
with protocol modifications can provide significant amount of increased SNR to
produce stellar image quality with no major time penalty. This increase in SNR is key to allowing for
this type of detailed imaging of the hippocampus minus the traditional methods
to achieve this quality of scan (fig 2). One of the unique features of DLRecon
is the flexibility for the user to dial in the specific level of noise
reduction needed for a particular series (fig 3). In this study, 75% was used yielding
sufficient amount of noise reduction without producing images that appear
overly corrected as with filtering (low and high pass) traditionally used. This
option may prove critical when dealing with data that has either high, moderate
or low amount of SNR depending on the protocol.Conclusion
In
this work, we demonstrated that deep learning noise removal reconstruction
method can provide significant improvement to SNR and noise reduction allowing
users to increase resolution for improved neuro-anatomic detail of the
hippocampal formation anatomy with minimal increase in patient scan/exam time. The hippocampus is an anatomically complex structure
and early hippocampal pathology remains difficult to detect in patients with
temporal lobe epilepsy. This newly developed approach to noise reduction allows
users to significantly shorten scan time and /or improve resolution and has
many potential clinical imaging applications. For exams that require high
signal to noise ratio for the highest available resolution- such as seizure
protocols significant improvement in anatomic detail may be achieved without
substantial scan time increase. Acknowledgements
No AcknowledgementsReferences
1.
Thomas BP, Welch EB, Niederhauser BD, et al.
High-resolution 7T MRI of the human hippocampus in vivo. J Magn Reson
Imaging. 2008;28(5):1266–1272. doi:10.1002/jmri.21576
2.
Hayman LA, Fuller GN, Cavazos JE, Pfleger MJ, Meyers CA, Jackson
EF. The hippocampus: normal anatomy and pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol
1998;171:1139–1146.