BACKGROUND: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is used to assess various cardiovascular conditions. However, gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) carry a risk of dose-related adverse effects. PURPOSE: To develop a deep learning method to reduce GBCA dose by 80%. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective and prospective. POPULATION: A total of 1157 retrospective and 40 prospective congenital heart disease patients for training/validation and testing, respectively. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: A 1.5 T, T1-weighted three-dimensional (3D) gradient echo. ASSESSMENT: A neural network was trained to enhance low-dose (LD) 3D MRA using retrospective synthetic data and tested with prospective LD data. Image quality for LD (LD-MRA), enhanced LD (ELD-MRA), and high-dose (HD-MRA) was assessed in terms of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and a quantitative measure of edge sharpness and scored for perceptual sharpness and contrast on a 1-5 scale. Diagnostic confidence was assessed on a 1-3 scale. LD- and ELD-MRA were assessed against HD-MRA for sensitivity/specificity and agreement of vessel diameter measurements (aorta and pulmonary arteries). STATISTICAL TESTS: SNR, CNR, edge sharpness, and vessel diameters were compared between LD-, ELD-, and HD-MRA using one-way repeated measures analysis of variance with post-hoc t-tests. Perceptual quality and diagnostic confidence were compared using Friedman's test with post-hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Sensitivity/specificity was compared using McNemar's test. Agreement of vessel diameters was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: SNR, CNR, edge sharpness, perceptual sharpness, and perceptual contrast were lower (P < 0.05) for LD-MRA compared to ELD-MRA and HD-MRA. SNR, CNR, edge sharpness, and perceptual contrast were comparable between ELD and HD-MRA, but perceptual sharpness was significantly lower. Sensitivity/specificity was 0.824/0.921 for LD-MRA and 0.882/0.960 for ELD-MRA. Diagnostic confidence was 2.72, 2.85, and 2.92 for LD, ELD, and HD-MRA, respectively (PLD-ELD , PLD-HD < 0.05). Vessel diameter measurements were comparable, with biases of 0.238 (LD-MRA) and 0.278 mm (ELD-MRA). DATA CONCLUSION: Deep learning can improve contrast in LD cardiovascular MRA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE LEVEL: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
BACKGROUND: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is used to assess various cardiovascular conditions. However, gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) carry a risk of dose-related adverse effects. PURPOSE: To develop a deep learning method to reduce GBCA dose by 80%. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective and prospective. POPULATION: A total of 1157 retrospective and 40 prospective congenital heart disease patients for training/validation and testing, respectively. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: A 1.5 T, T1-weighted three-dimensional (3D) gradient echo. ASSESSMENT: A neural network was trained to enhance low-dose (LD) 3D MRA using retrospective synthetic data and tested with prospective LD data. Image quality for LD (LD-MRA), enhanced LD (ELD-MRA), and high-dose (HD-MRA) was assessed in terms of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and a quantitative measure of edge sharpness and scored for perceptual sharpness and contrast on a 1-5 scale. Diagnostic confidence was assessed on a 1-3 scale. LD- and ELD-MRA were assessed against HD-MRA for sensitivity/specificity and agreement of vessel diameter measurements (aorta and pulmonary arteries). STATISTICAL TESTS: SNR, CNR, edge sharpness, and vessel diameters were compared between LD-, ELD-, and HD-MRA using one-way repeated measures analysis of variance with post-hoc t-tests. Perceptual quality and diagnostic confidence were compared using Friedman's test with post-hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Sensitivity/specificity was compared using McNemar's test. Agreement of vessel diameters was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: SNR, CNR, edge sharpness, perceptual sharpness, and perceptual contrast were lower (P < 0.05) for LD-MRA compared to ELD-MRA and HD-MRA. SNR, CNR, edge sharpness, and perceptual contrast were comparable between ELD and HD-MRA, but perceptual sharpness was significantly lower. Sensitivity/specificity was 0.824/0.921 for LD-MRA and 0.882/0.960 for ELD-MRA. Diagnostic confidence was 2.72, 2.85, and 2.92 for LD, ELD, and HD-MRA, respectively (PLD-ELD , PLD-HD < 0.05). Vessel diameter measurements were comparable, with biases of 0.238 (LD-MRA) and 0.278 mm (ELD-MRA). DATA CONCLUSION: Deep learning can improve contrast in LD cardiovascular MRA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE LEVEL: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.