| Literature DB >> 24194941 |
Ronald van 't Klooster1, Andrew J Patterson, Victoria E Young, Jonathan H Gillard, Johan H C Reiber, Rob J van der Geest.
Abstract
A typical MR imaging protocol to study the status of atherosclerosis in the carotid artery consists of the application of multiple MR sequences. Since scanner time is limited, a balance has to be reached between the duration of the applied MR protocol and the quantity and quality of the resulting images which are needed to assess the disease. In this study an objective method to optimize the MR sequence set for classification of soft plaque in vessel wall images of the carotid artery using automated image segmentation was developed. The automated method employs statistical pattern recognition techniques and was developed based on an extensive set of MR contrast weightings and corresponding manual segmentations of the vessel wall and soft plaque components, which were validated by histological sections. Evaluation of the results from nine contrast weightings showed the tradeoff between scan duration and automated image segmentation performance. For our dataset the best segmentation performance was achieved by selecting five contrast weightings. Similar performance was achieved with a set of three contrast weightings, which resulted in a reduction of scan time by more than 60%. The presented approach can help others to optimize MR imaging protocols by investigating the tradeoff between scan duration and automated image segmentation performance possibly leading to shorter scanning times and better image interpretation. This approach can potentially also be applied to other research fields focusing on different diseases and anatomical regions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24194941 PMCID: PMC3806831 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078492
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Carotid MR imaging pulse sequence parameters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acquisition | 2D TOF - Axial | 2D FSE - Axial | 2D FSE - Axial | 2D FSE - Axial | 3D FSPGR - Coronal | 2D EPI - Axial |
| FOV (cm) | 22x22 | 10x10 | 10x10 | 10x10 | 10x10 | 16x16 |
| pFOV | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 |
| Matrix | 512x512 | 256x256 | 256x256 | 256x256 | 160x160 | 128x128 |
| NEX | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 16 |
| TR (ms) | 16.6 | 1R-R | 2R-R | 2R-R | 5.7 | 2200 |
| TE (ms) | 4.1 | 7.7 | 99.7/7.7 | 99.7 | 2.6 | ~75 |
| TI (ms) | - | - | - | 150 | 19.0 | - |
| Slice thickness (mm) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 |
| ETL | - | 12 | 16 | 24 | 1 | - |
| Fat suppression | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes |
| In-plane resolution (mm) | 0.86 | 0.39 | 0.39 | 0.39 | 0.625 | 1.25 |
| Scan Time (min:sec) [ | 0:48 | 5:22 | 8:24 | 5:36 | 2:09 | 4:42 |
Scan times for either a 3D slab or multiple consecutive 2D slices compassing 21mm of carotid/plaque (assumes heart rate of 60bpm)
Figure 1Scheme of the contrast weighting selection and the automatic image segmentation procedure.
The procedure is started by the selection of a combination of contrast weightings. The automated image segmentation method is applied to that combination of contrast weightings and the reference standard which is based on the manual segmentation. The automated segmentation results are compared with the reference standard. This automated image segmentation procedure is then repeated for each contrast weighting selection and results of each combination are collected.
Plaque composition of patient population (n=15).
|
|
|
|---|---|
| Calcium (n=5) | 26.5 (± 15.5) |
| Hemorrhage (n=4) | 75.6 (± 48.3) |
| Lipid (n=14) | 142.0 (± 115.8) |
SD, Standard Deviation.
Figure 2Comparison between automated segmentation performance, contrast weighting combinations and scan duration.
The ten best contrast weighting combinations ranked by the correlation between the automated image segmentation and the reference standard are shown using a bar plot. Each bar represents one set of contrast weightings (contrast weightings are tiled horizontally on the horizontal axis). The total MR scan duration of each set is superimposed using a line plot.
Correlation between the automated image segmentation and the reference standard ranked by number of contrast weightings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOF | 1 | 0.711 [0.312-0.897] |
| 0.8 |
| TOF-MRDTI | 2 | 0.860 [0.622-0.953] |
| 3.0 |
| TOF-MRDTI-ADC | 3 | 0.886 [0.683-0.962] |
| 7.7 |
| TOF-MRDTI-ADC-T2W | 4 | 0.885 [0.682-0.961] |
| 16.1 |
| TOF-MRDTI-ADC-PDW-T1W | 5 | 0.887 [0.688-0.962] |
| 21.4 |
| TOF-MRDTI-ADC-PDW-T1W-T2W | 6 | 0.877 [0.663-0.959] |
| 21.4 |
| TOF-MRDTI-ADC-PDW-T1W-DWI- DWT2 | 7 | 0.878 [0.665-959] |
| 21.4 |
| TOF-MRDTI-ADC-PDW-T1W-DWI-DWT2-T2W | 8 | 0.855 [0.611-0.951] |
| 21.4 |
CI, Confidence Interval.min, minutes.
Figure 3Automated segmentation results for two sets of contrast weightings including MR images and histology.
A) segmentation result for the contrast weighting set TOF-MRDTI-ADC showing the overlap between the automated segmentation method and the reference standard (green: true positive lesion, blue: false negative lesion, red: false positive lesion), B) TOF image, C) MRDTI image, D) ADC image, E) segmentation result for the set TOF-MRDTI-ADC-PDW-T1W, F) T1W image, G) PDW image, and H) the matching histological slice with elastic Van Gieson staining. The contours of the reference standard are overlaid on the different MR images (panels B,C,D,F,G). The lumen and vessel wall are depicted by the red and green contour, soft plaque is depicted by the yellow contour. The yellow colour in the histological slice in panel H is consistent with the presence of lipid.