AI-powered Gradient Echo Plural Contrast Imaging (AI-GEPCI): a Comprehensive Multiparametric Neurological Protocol from a Single MRI Scan
Lewis, J.; Goyal, m. S.; Wu, G. F.; Hu, Y.; Sukstanskii, A. L.; Kothapalli, S. V.; Cross, A. H.; Kamilov, U.; Yablonskiy, D. A.
Show abstract
BackgroundMRI plays an essential role in diagnosing and monitoring neurological diseases. Conventional protocols rely on multiple sequences to obtain complementary contrasts, increasing scan time, cost, and tolerability. Generating multiple contrasts from a single acquisition may streamline workflow while maintaining clinical utility. PurposeTrain attention-based convolutional neural networks (ACNNs) to generate clinical-quality FLAIR, MPRAGE, R2*, and derived contrasts from a single Gradient Echo Plural Contrast Imaging (GEPCI) acquisition, enabling multi-contrast imaging from one scan. Study TypeRetrospective. Population43 MRI scans from individuals with multiple sclerosis (25/18 F/M, 49{+/-}11 years old). Field Strength/Sequence3T MRI was used to obtain 3D GEPCI, MPRAGE, and FLAIR sequences. AssessmentTechnical quality of the AI-generated contrasts was evaluated against directly acquired MRI images using structural similarity index (SSIM). Quantitative accuracy for R2* maps was evaluated using normalized root-mean-square error (NRMSE). Clinical image quality was assessed by expert physicians. Lesion volumes and counts were obtained using automated segmentation. ResultsAI-generated FLAIR and MPRAGE images achieved mean SSIM values of 0.923{+/-}0.028 and 0.935{+/-}0.022, respectively. The generated R2* maps achieved a mean SSIM of 0.996{+/-}0.006, with quantitative accuracy reflected by an NRMSE of 0.031{+/-}0.020. Physicians rated GEPCI-FLAIR images at 4.2 and GEPCI-MPRAGE images at 4.5 (on a 1-to-5 scale), both exceeding the clinically routine standard of 4.0. Lesion volume and count comparisons from automated segmentation showed strong agreement between AI-generated and ground-truth measurements (R{superscript 2}=0.988 and R{superscript 2}=0.933, respectively). ConclusionAI-GEPCI generated multiple clinically relevant MRI contrasts from a single GEPCI acquisition with high similarity to corresponding acquired images. Radiological reviews and quantitative analyses supported the feasibility of producing high-quality, intrinsically co-registered multi-contrasts for comprehensive brain evaluation.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Portable, Low-Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sensitively Detects and Accurately Quantifies Multiple Sclerosis Lesions 98%
- Fully Automated Detection of Paramagnetic Rims in Multiple Sclerosis Lesions on 3T Susceptibility-Based MR Imaging 98%
- Fluid and White Matter Suppression Contrasts MRI Improves Deep Learning Detection of Multiple Sclerosis Cortical Lesions 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- Neuroanatomical underpinning of diffusion kurtosis measurements in the cerebral cortex of healthy macaque brains 96%
- Myelin water imaging depends on white matter fiber orientation in the human brain 96%
- MASiVar: Multisite, Multiscanner, and Multisubject Acquisitions for Studying Variability in Diffusion Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Multiple sclerosis cortical lesion detection with deep learning at ultra-high-field MRI 96%
- Gradient scheme optimization for PRESS-localized edited MRS using weighted pathway suppression 95%
- Non-negative least squares computation for in vivo myelin mapping using simulated multi-echo spin-echo T2 decay data 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Cerebrospinal Fluid Flow within Ventricles and Subarachnoid Space Evaluated by Velocity Selective Spin Labeling MRI 96%
- Increased Sensitivity and Signal-to-Noise Ratio in Diffusion-Weighted MRI using Multi-Echo Acquisitions 95%
- Direct and specific assessment of axonal injury and spinal cord microenvironments using diffusion correlation imaging 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.