BACKGROUND: To introduce a segmentation method to calculate an automatic arterial input function (AIF) based on principal component analysis (PCA) of dynamic contrast enhanced MR (DCE-MR) imaging and compare it with individual manually selected and population-averaged AIFs using calculated pharmacokinetic parameters. METHODS: The study included 65 individuals with prostate examinations (27 tumors and 38 controls). Manual AIFs were individually extracted and also averaged to obtain a population AIF. Automatic AIFs were individually obtained by applying PCA to volumetric DCE-MR imaging data and finding the highest correlation of the PCs with a reference AIF. Variability was assessed using coefficients of variation and repeated measures tests. The different AIFs were used as inputs to the pharmacokinetic model and correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman plots and analysis of variance tests were obtained to compare the results. RESULTS: Automatic PCA-based AIFs were successfully extracted in all cases. The manual and PCA-based AIFs showed good correlation (r between pharmacokinetic parameters ranging from 0.74 to 0.95), with differences below the manual individual variability (RMSCV up to 27.3%). The population-averaged AIF showed larger differences (r from 0.30 to 0.61). CONCLUSION: The automatic PCA-based approach minimizes the variability associated to obtaining individual volume-based AIFs in DCE-MR studies of the prostate.
BACKGROUND: To introduce a segmentation method to calculate an automatic arterial input function (AIF) based on principal component analysis (PCA) of dynamic contrast enhanced MR (DCE-MR) imaging and compare it with individual manually selected and population-averaged AIFs using calculated pharmacokinetic parameters. METHODS: The study included 65 individuals with prostate examinations (27 tumors and 38 controls). Manual AIFs were individually extracted and also averaged to obtain a population AIF. Automatic AIFs were individually obtained by applying PCA to volumetric DCE-MR imaging data and finding the highest correlation of the PCs with a reference AIF. Variability was assessed using coefficients of variation and repeated measures tests. The different AIFs were used as inputs to the pharmacokinetic model and correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman plots and analysis of variance tests were obtained to compare the results. RESULTS: Automatic PCA-based AIFs were successfully extracted in all cases. The manual and PCA-based AIFs showed good correlation (r between pharmacokinetic parameters ranging from 0.74 to 0.95), with differences below the manual individual variability (RMSCV up to 27.3%). The population-averaged AIF showed larger differences (r from 0.30 to 0.61). CONCLUSION: The automatic PCA-based approach minimizes the variability associated to obtaining individual volume-based AIFs in DCE-MR studies of the prostate.
Authors: Jonghyun Bae; Zhengnan Huang; Florian Knoll; Krzysztof Geras; Terlika Pandit Sood; Li Feng; Laura Heacock; Linda Moy; Sungheon Gene Kim Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-01-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Shoshana B Ginsburg; Pekka Taimen; Harri Merisaari; Paula Vainio; Peter J Boström; Hannu J Aronen; Ivan Jambor; Anant Madabhushi Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-06-10 Impact factor: 5.119