MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.3390/diagnostics15182341

Медицинская библиотека · Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025

Artificial Intelligence-Based Arterial Input Function for the Quantitative Assessment of Myocardial Blood Flow and Perfusion Reserve in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance: A Validation Study.

van der Meulen Lara R, van Dinther Maud, Chiribiri Amedeo, Smink Jouke, Crucial Investigators, Backes Walter H, Bennett Jonathan, Wildberger Joachim E, Scannell Cian M, Holtackers Robert J

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

Background/

Objectives

To validate an artificial intelligence-based arterial input function (AI-AIF) deep learning model for myocardial blood flow (MBF) quantification during stress perfusion and assess its extension to rest perfusion, enabling myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) calculation.

Methods

Sixty patients with or at risk for vascular cognitive impairment, prospectively enrolled in the CRUCIAL consortium, underwent quantitative stress and rest myocardial perfusion imaging using a 3 T MRI system. Perfusion imaging was performed using a dual-sequence (DS) protocol after intravenous administration of 0.05 mmol/kg gadobutrol. Retrospectively, the AI-AIF was estimated from standard perfusion images using a 1-D U-Net model trained to predict an unsaturated AIF from a saturated input. MBF was quantified using Fermi function-constrained deconvolution with motion compensation. MPR was calculated as the stress-to-rest MBF ratio. MBF and MPR estimates from both AIF methods were compared using Bland-Altman analyses.

Results

Complete stress and rest perfusion datasets were available for 31 patients. A bias of -0.07 mL/g/min was observed between AI-AIF and DS-AIF for stress MBF (median 2.19 vs. 2.30 mL/g/min), with concordant coronary artery disease classification based on the optimal MBF threshold in over 92% of myocardial segments and coronary arteries. Larger biases of 0.12 mL/g/min and -0.30 were observed for rest MBF (1.12 vs. 1.02 mL/g/min) and MPR (2.31 vs. 1.84), respectively, with lower concordance using the optimal MPR threshold (85% of segments, 72% of arteries).

Conclusions

The AI-AIF model showed comparable performance to DS-AIF for stress MBF quantification but requires further training for accurate rest MBF and MPR assessment.

Для цитирования: van der Meulen Lara R, van Dinther Maud, Chiribiri Amedeo, Smink Jouke, Crucial Investigators, Backes Walter H, Bennett Jonathan, Wildberger Joachim E, Scannell Cian M, Holtackers Robert J. Artificial Intelligence-Based Arterial Input Function for the Quantitative Assessment of Myocardial Blood Flow and Perfusion Reserve in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance: A Validation Study.. Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland). 2025. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics15182341.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.