Maria Monzon1,2, Seung Su Yoon1,2, Carola Fischer2, Andreas Maier1, Jens Wetzl2, and Daniel Giese2
1Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany, 2Magnetic Resonance, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany
Synopsis
The analysis of
mitral valve motion is known to be relevant in the diagnosis of cardiac
dysfunction. Dynamic motion parameters
can be extracted from Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) images. We propose two
chained Convolutional Neural Networks for automatic tracking of mitral
valve-annulus landmarks on time-resolved 2-chamber and 4-chamber CMR images. The
first network is trained to detect the region of interest and the second to
track the landmarks along the cardiac cycle. We successfully extracted several
motion-related parameters with high accuracy as well as analyzed unlabeled
datasets, thereby overcoming time-consuming annotation and allowing statistical
analysis over large number of datasets.
Introduction
Overall prevalence of heart failure with preserved
ejection fraction (HFpEF) has been reported to be 1.1–5.5 % in the general
population and is typically related to diastolic dysfunction1. It is
known that the analysis of the mitral valve annulus (MVA) throughout the
cardiac cycle might act, amongst others, as a predictor for HFpEF2.
We propose a robust, fully automated algorithm that
tracks the MVA insertion points on 2-chamber (2CHV) and/or 4-chamber (4CHV),
CINE CMR series. The network system initially detects the mitral valves’ region
of interest (ROI) before extracting the time-resolved MVA landmarks. This
information is then used to extract motion-related parameters including
velocities (e’-waves) and diameters. The system performance is analyzed based
on annotated data. Thereafter, motion parameters are extracted retrospectively
on N=1468 unlabeled datasets3.
In recent work, atrioventricular plane tracking was shown feasible using
direct coordinate regression, however, without temporal feature extraction4,
in contrast to the present work.Materials and Methods
Data: Ground-truth annotated images from 83 subjects were
provided by the Cardiac Atlas Project landmark detection challenge, composed of
1.5T (99%) and 3T (1%) 2CHV and 4CHV. This multi-vendor (GE Medical Systems, Philips
Medical Systems, Siemens Healthcare) data included semi-automatically annotated
MVA landmarks throughout the cardiac cycle
5. Mean in-plane
resolution was $$$1.48\pm0.37 $$$ mm.
Network System (Fig. 1): All CINE
series were temporally interpolated to 32 timeframes, flipped to show the apex in an upwards orientation and
split into 70% training, 15% validation and 15% testing data subsets. The algorithm
consists of two chained CNNs, both trained to detect landmarks based on a heatmap
regression task
6. The first network (
Localization CNN) is a Residual 2D
UNet
7 model identifying the MVA ROI in both, 4CHV or 2CHV by
regressing three landmarks on the first timeframe of each series. After
rotation cropping and 0.5 mm pixel space interpolation, a 3D UNet
8,
the second network (
Landmarks CNN) extracts time-resolved
heatmaps of both landmarks. A post-processing step fits a Gaussian to refine
the final landmark coordinates.
Training: The model (Fig. 2) was
trained from scratch using the Adaptive Wing Loss
9 on the heatmaps while
decreasing the heatmaps standard deviation
10 exponentially throughout training epochs $$$ σ_{ep}=16 \cdot 0.95^{ep} $$$. The networks were trained using Adam optimizer
11 with momentum of $$$\beta=0.9$$$ and learning rate $$$\lambda=0.0001$$$ with weight decay regularization. Online data
augmentation was performed using random rotation, contrast enhancement,
translation, maximum clipping, blurring and noise addition.
Parameter Extraction: Time-resolved
motion curves were extracted from the CNN and the following derived parameters
calculated (Fig. 3):
- MVA plane displacement (MVAPD) curve was defined as the
time-resolved perpendicular distance of the MVA plane relative to the first
frame. Peak displacement (MVAPD-PD) was also extracted4,12.
- MVA plane velocity (MVAPV) was derived as the
MVAPD time-resolved discrete temporal derivate4,12. Early diastolic
velocity (MVAPV-e´) was then defined as the central maximum of the
MVAPV.
- The total motion of the annulus (VAD) was
quantified as the total displacement sum over all timeframes in mm.
- The septal and lateral MVA landmark velocity curves (SMVAV, LMVAV) were computed as the temporal derivative of each landmark
displacement 13.
The central maximum of each curve represents early annular diastolic
velocity (MAVL-e’).
-
The time-resolved diameter evolution throughout the cardiac cycle was
derived as the Euclidean distance between landmarks in mm and the maximum
diameter14 (MAMD) as well as the difference between maximum
and minimum diameter (MADC) were extracted6.
Analysis: Network accuracy was evaluated by the root mean square
difference between ground truth and detected landmarks as well as by a Bland-Altman
analysis (Fig. 4) on extracted motion parameters. On 1468 unlabeled datasets
3
(this research has been conducted using the UK
Biobank Resource, access application 30769) acquired on
1.5T systems (MAGNETOM, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany), successful
inference was assessed by detecting unambiguous outliers.
Every tracked series whose plane displacement is not temporally smooth (mean
standard deviation) at any cardiac phase is discarded. Finally, motion
parameters were extracted from this data (Fig. 5).
Results
Landmark coordinate mean errors
of $$$1.75 \pm 0.64 $$$ (2CHV) and $$$ 1.74 \pm 0.72$$$ 4CHV, were achieved.
Bland-Altman analysis revealed following mean agreement values (Fig. 4) : MVAPD-PD: $$$0.51\pm2.42 $$$ mm, MVAPV-e´: $$$0.08\pm2.44 $$$ cm/s, VAD: $$$15.39\pm54.62$$$ mm and for MAVL-e’ $$$0.08 \pm3.73$$$ cm/s; MAMD: $$$0.31\pm3.66$$$ mm and MADC $$$0.28\pm3.12$$$
mm.
The localization network fails to locate the ROI
in less than $$$0.5\%$$$ of unlabeled datasets and at least one time-frame was not
smoothly tracked in $$$16.53\%$$$ of unlabeled series.Discussion and Conclusion
The proposed system
was shown to successfully track MVA landmarks with a mean error in the range of
the data’s resolution. Extraction of derived parameters of interest was
successful and showed good agreement with ground-truth data, based on Bland-Altman
analysis. Heatmap regression avoids the need to learn the highly non-linear
domain transfer, from pixel to coordinate space which might explain the high
accuracy with a comparatively small annotated dataset size (N=83).
Future work will
include on-line integration of the approach and analysis of motion parameters
on larger numbers of categorized patient datasets. Furthermore, a prospective
slice-tracking CMR acquisition is planned for improved morphological and/or flow
measurements of the mitral valve15.Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1.Oktay, A Afşin
et al. “The emerging epidemic of heart failure with preserved ejection
fraction.” Current heart failure reports vol. 10,4 (2013): 401-10.
doi:10.1007/s11897-013-0155-7
2. Ramos, João
G et al. “Comprehensive Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Diastolic Dysfunction
Grading Shows Very Good Agreement Compared With Echocardiography.” JACC.
Cardiovascular imaging vol. 13,12 (2020): 2530-2542.
doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.06.027
3. Sudlow, Cathie
et al. “UK biobank: an open access resource for identifying the causes of a wide
range of complex diseases of middle and old age.” PLoS medicine vol. 12,3
e1001779. 31 Mar. 2015, doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001779
4.Gonzales Ricardo
A et. al.Time-resolved tracking of the
atrioventricular plane displacement in long-axis cine images with residual
neural networks. Proceedings of the Joint Annual Meeting ISMRM-ESMRMB (28th
Annual Meeting & Exhibition) (2020)
5.Fonseca,
Carissa G et al. “The Cardiac Atlas Project--an imaging database for computational
modeling and statistical atlases of the heart.” Bioinformatics (Oxford,
England) vol. 27,16 (2011): 2288-95. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btr360
6. Payer,
Christian et al. “Integrating spatial configuration into heatmap regression
based CNNs for landmark localization.” Medical image analysis vol. 54 (2019):
207-219. doi:10.1016/j.media.2019.03.007
7. Ronneberger,
Olaf, et al. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation.
International Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted
intervention. Springer, Cham, 2015.
8. Özgün Çiçek,
et. al. 3D U-Net: Learning Dense Volumetric Segmentation from Sparse
Annotation. CoRR abs/1606.06650 (2016)
9. Xinyao Wang
et. al., L. Bo and L. Fuxin, "Adaptive Wing Loss for Robust Face Alignment
via Heatmap Regression," 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer
Vision (ICCV), Seoul, Korea (South), 2019, pp. 6970-6980, doi:
10.1109/ICCV.2019.00707.
10.Teixeira,
Brian et al. “Adaloss: Adaptive Loss Function for Landmark Localization.” ArXiv
abs/1908.01070 (2019).
11. Kingma,
Diederik P., et al. (2014). Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization.
International Conference on Learning Representations .arXiv preprint
arXiv:1412.6980 (2014).
12. Seemann, F.
et al. “Time-resolved tracking of the atrioventricular plane displacement in
Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (CMR) images.” BMC Medical Imaging 17 (2017):
13.Thavendiranathan,
P. et al. “Mitral annular velocity measurement with cardiac magnetic resonance
imaging using a novel annular tracking algorithm: Validation against
echocardiography.” Magnetic resonance imaging 55 (2019): 72-80 .
14. Han, Yuchi et
al. “Cardiovascular magnetic resonance characterization of mitral valve
prolapse.” JACC. Cardiovascular imaging vol. 1,3 (2008): 294-303.
doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2008.01.013.
15. Seemann,
Felicia et al. “Valvular imaging in the era of feature-tracking: A
slice-following cardiac MR sequence to measure mitral flow.” Journal of
magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI vol. 51,5 (2019): 1412-1421. doi:10.1002/jmri.26971