Deep learning evaluation reveals accurate MR fingerprinting synthesis from standard brain MRI in healthy adults, suggesting quantitative relaxometry is achievable without specialized sequences.
Background MR fingerprinting (MRF) is a novel method for quantitative assessment of in vivo MR relaxometry that has shown high precision and accuracy. However, the method requires data acquisition using customized, complex acquisition strategies and dedicated post processing methods thereby limiting its widespread application. Objective To develop a deep learning (DL) network for synthesizing MRF signals from conventional magnitude-only MR imaging data and to compare the results to the actual MRF signal acquired. Methods A U-Net DL network was developed to synthesize MRF signals from magnitude-only 3D T 1 -weighted brain MRI data acquired from 37 volunteers aged between 21 and 62 years of age. Network performance was evaluated by comparison of the relaxometry data ( T 1 , T 2 ) generated from dictionary matching of the deep learning synthesized and actual MRF data from 47 segmented anatomic regions. Clustered bootstrapping involving 10,000 bootstraps followed by calculation of the concordance correlation coefficient were performed for both T 1 and T 2 MRF data pairs. 95% confidence limits and the mean difference between true and DL relaxometry values were also calculated. Results The concordance correlation coefficient (and 95% confidence limits) for T 1 and T 2 MRF data pairs over the 47 anatomic segments were 0.8793 (0.8136–0.9383) and 0.9078 (0.8981–0.9145) respectively. The mean difference (and 95% confidence limits) were 48.23 (23.0–77.3) s and 2.02 (−1.4 to 4.8) s. Conclusion It is possible to synthesize MRF signals from MRI data using a DL network, thereby creating the potential for performing quantitative relaxometry assessment without the need for a dedicated MRF pulse sequence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McGee et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: