Why the study?
Does HMT model-based compressed sensing maintain diagnostic quality and quantitative accuracy while accelerating 3D carotid MRI in patients with carotid stenosis?
Does HMT model-based compressed sensing maintain diagnostic quality and quantitative accuracy while accelerating 3D carotid MRI in patients with carotid stenosis?
HMT model-based compressed sensing can accelerate clinical carotid MRI by a factor of 4.5 without compromising diagnostic quality or quantitative morphological measurements.
May support faster carotid MRI protocols; leaves open prospective validation in stenosis cohorts.
PURPOSE: To determine the potential for accelerated 3D carotid magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using wavelet based compressed sensing (CS) with a hidden Markov tree (HMT) model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively applied HMT model-based CS and conventional CS to 3D carotid MRI data with 0.7 mm isotropic resolution from six subjects with known carotid stenosis (12 carotids). We applied a wavelet-tree model learned from a training database of carotid images to improve CS reconstruction. Quantitative endpoints such as lumen area, wall area, mean and maximum wall thickness, plaque calcification, and necrotic core area were measured and compared using Bland-Altman analysis along with image quality. RESULTS: Rate-4.5 acceleration with HMT model-based CS provided image quality comparable to that of rate-3 acceleration with conventional CS and fully sampled reference reconstructions. Morphological measurements made on rate-4.5 HMT model-based CS reconstructions were in good agreement with measurements made on fully sampled reference images. There was no significant bias or correlation between mean and difference of measurements when comparing rate 4.5 HMT model-based CS with fully sampled reference images. CONCLUSION: HMT model-based CS can potentially be used to accelerate clinical carotid MRI by a factor of 4.5 without impacting diagnostic quality or quantitative endpoints.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Makhijani et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: