Cardiovascular magnetic resonance images with susceptibility artifacts: artificial intelligence with spatial-attention for ventricular volumes and mass assessment.
Cardiac magnetic resonance
Cardiac segmentation
Cardioverter-defibrillators
Deep learning
Pacemaker
Susceptibility artifacts
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
ISSN: 1532-429X
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9815616
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 11 2022
28 11 2022
Historique:
received:
26
04
2022
accepted:
02
11
2022
entrez:
27
11
2022
pubmed:
28
11
2022
medline:
30
11
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Segmentation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) images is an essential step for evaluating dimensional and functional ventricular parameters as ejection fraction (EF) but may be limited by artifacts, which represent the major challenge to automatically derive clinical information. The aim of this study is to investigate the accuracy of a deep learning (DL) approach for automatic segmentation of cardiac structures from CMR images characterized by magnetic susceptibility artifact in patient with cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIED). In this retrospective study, 230 patients (100 with CIED) who underwent clinically indicated CMR were used to developed and test a DL model. A novel convolutional neural network was proposed to extract the left ventricle (LV) and right (RV) ventricle endocardium and LV epicardium. In order to perform a successful segmentation, it is important the network learns to identify salient image regions even during local magnetic field inhomogeneities. The proposed network takes advantage from a spatial attention module to selectively process the most relevant information and focus on the structures of interest. To improve segmentation, especially for images with artifacts, multiple loss functions were minimized in unison. Segmentation results were assessed against manual tracings and commercial CMR analysis software cvi In the internal datasets, on image with artifacts, the median Dice coefficients for end-diastolic LV cavity, LV myocardium and RV cavity, were 0.93, 0.77 and 0.87 and 0.91, 0.82, and 0.83 in end-systole, respectively. The proposed method reached higher segmentation accuracy than commercial software, with performance comparable to expert inter-observer variability (bias ± 95%LoA): LVEF 1 ± 8% vs 3 ± 9%, RVEF - 2 ± 15% vs 3 ± 21%. In the external cohort, EF well correlated with manual tracing (intraclass correlation coefficient: LVEF 0.98, RVEF 0.93). The automatic approach was significant faster than manual segmentation in providing cardiac parameters (approximately 1.5 s vs 450 s). Experimental results show that the proposed method reached promising performance in cardiac segmentation from CMR images with susceptibility artifacts and alleviates time consuming expert physician contour segmentation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Segmentation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) images is an essential step for evaluating dimensional and functional ventricular parameters as ejection fraction (EF) but may be limited by artifacts, which represent the major challenge to automatically derive clinical information. The aim of this study is to investigate the accuracy of a deep learning (DL) approach for automatic segmentation of cardiac structures from CMR images characterized by magnetic susceptibility artifact in patient with cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIED).
METHODS
In this retrospective study, 230 patients (100 with CIED) who underwent clinically indicated CMR were used to developed and test a DL model. A novel convolutional neural network was proposed to extract the left ventricle (LV) and right (RV) ventricle endocardium and LV epicardium. In order to perform a successful segmentation, it is important the network learns to identify salient image regions even during local magnetic field inhomogeneities. The proposed network takes advantage from a spatial attention module to selectively process the most relevant information and focus on the structures of interest. To improve segmentation, especially for images with artifacts, multiple loss functions were minimized in unison. Segmentation results were assessed against manual tracings and commercial CMR analysis software cvi
RESULTS
In the internal datasets, on image with artifacts, the median Dice coefficients for end-diastolic LV cavity, LV myocardium and RV cavity, were 0.93, 0.77 and 0.87 and 0.91, 0.82, and 0.83 in end-systole, respectively. The proposed method reached higher segmentation accuracy than commercial software, with performance comparable to expert inter-observer variability (bias ± 95%LoA): LVEF 1 ± 8% vs 3 ± 9%, RVEF - 2 ± 15% vs 3 ± 21%. In the external cohort, EF well correlated with manual tracing (intraclass correlation coefficient: LVEF 0.98, RVEF 0.93). The automatic approach was significant faster than manual segmentation in providing cardiac parameters (approximately 1.5 s vs 450 s).
CONCLUSIONS
Experimental results show that the proposed method reached promising performance in cardiac segmentation from CMR images with susceptibility artifacts and alleviates time consuming expert physician contour segmentation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36437452
doi: 10.1186/s12968-022-00899-5
pii: 10.1186/s12968-022-00899-5
pmc: PMC9703740
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
62Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2018 Jun;37(6):1310-1321
pubmed: 29870361
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2002 Mar;3(3):201-15
pubmed: 11994752
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013 May 01;15:35
pubmed: 23634753
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2019 Oct 7;21(1):61
pubmed: 31590664
Front Robot AI. 2020 Aug 28;7:106
pubmed: 33501273
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2020 Feb;184:105128
pubmed: 31627146
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017 Nov;3(11):1231-1239
pubmed: 29759618
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2021 Jun;204:106059
pubmed: 33812305
Magn Reson Imaging. 2020 Sep;71:1-10
pubmed: 32407764
Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Oct;32(7):440-447
pubmed: 34384880
Neth Heart J. 2018 Dec;26(12):584-590
pubmed: 30406601
Comput Biol Med. 2021 Oct;137:104815
pubmed: 34507156
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2018 Nov;37(11):2514-2525
pubmed: 29994302
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2018 Sep 14;20(1):65
pubmed: 30217194
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2020 Mar 05;7:25
pubmed: 32195270
Med Image Anal. 2016 May;30:108-119
pubmed: 26917105
Cureus. 2021 Oct 18;13(10):e18866
pubmed: 34820210
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2020 Nov;196:105623
pubmed: 32652355
Magn Reson Med Sci. 2020 Feb 10;19(1):64-76
pubmed: 31061259
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2018 Jul 5;20(1):47
pubmed: 29973228
N Engl J Med. 2017 Feb 23;376(8):755-764
pubmed: 28225684
Front Physiol. 2021 Aug 03;12:709230
pubmed: 34413789
Eur J Heart Fail. 2009 Dec;11(12):1143-51
pubmed: 19884129
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986 Dec;147(6):1271-81
pubmed: 3490763