Sona Ghadimi1, Daniel A Auger1, Xue Feng1, Changyu Sun1, Craig H Meyer1, Kenneth C Bilchick2, Jie Jane Cao3, Andrew D Scott4, John N Oshinski5, Daniel B Ennis6, Frederick H Epstein7. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Virginia, Health System, Box 800759, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, USA. 3. Department of Cardiology, St. Francis Hospital, New York, NY, USA. 4. Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Unit, The Royal Brompton Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 5. Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. 6. Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 7. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Virginia, Health System, Box 800759, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA. fhe6b@virginia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) cine displacement encoding with stimulated echoes (DENSE) measures heart motion by encoding myocardial displacement into the signal phase, facilitating high accuracy and reproducibility of global and segmental myocardial strain and providing benefits in clinical performance. While conventional methods for strain analysis of DENSE images are faster than those for myocardial tagging, they still require manual user assistance. The present study developed and evaluated deep learning methods for fully-automatic DENSE strain analysis. METHODS: Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) were developed and trained to (a) identify the left-ventricular (LV) epicardial and endocardial borders, (b) identify the anterior right-ventricular (RV)-LV insertion point, and (c) perform phase unwrapping. Subsequent conventional automatic steps were employed to compute strain. The networks were trained using 12,415 short-axis DENSE images from 45 healthy subjects and 19 heart disease patients and were tested using 10,510 images from 25 healthy subjects and 19 patients. Each individual CNN was evaluated, and the end-to-end fully-automatic deep learning pipeline was compared to conventional user-assisted DENSE analysis using linear correlation and Bland Altman analysis of circumferential strain. RESULTS: LV myocardial segmentation U-Nets achieved a DICE similarity coefficient of 0.87 ± 0.04, a Hausdorff distance of 2.7 ± 1.0 pixels, and a mean surface distance of 0.41 ± 0.29 pixels in comparison with manual LV myocardial segmentation by an expert. The anterior RV-LV insertion point was detected within 1.38 ± 0.9 pixels compared to manually annotated data. The phase-unwrapping U-Net had similar or lower mean squared error vs. ground-truth data compared to the conventional path-following method for images with typical signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) or low SNR (p < 0.05), respectively. Bland-Altman analyses showed biases of 0.00 ± 0.03 and limits of agreement of - 0.04 to 0.05 or better for deep learning-based fully-automatic global and segmental end-systolic circumferential strain vs. conventional user-assisted methods. CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning enables fully-automatic global and segmental circumferential strain analysis of DENSE CMR providing excellent agreement with conventional user-assisted methods. Deep learning-based automatic strain analysis may facilitate greater clinical use of DENSE for the quantification of global and segmental strain in patients with cardiac disease.
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) cine displacement encoding with stimulated echoes (DENSE) measures heart motion by encoding myocardial displacement into the signal phase, facilitating high accuracy and reproducibility of global and segmental myocardial strain and providing benefits in clinical performance. While conventional methods for strain analysis of DENSE images are faster than those for myocardial tagging, they still require manual user assistance. The present study developed and evaluated deep learning methods for fully-automatic DENSE strain analysis. METHODS: Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) were developed and trained to (a) identify the left-ventricular (LV) epicardial and endocardial borders, (b) identify the anterior right-ventricular (RV)-LV insertion point, and (c) perform phase unwrapping. Subsequent conventional automatic steps were employed to compute strain. The networks were trained using 12,415 short-axis DENSE images from 45 healthy subjects and 19 heart disease patients and were tested using 10,510 images from 25 healthy subjects and 19 patients. Each individual CNN was evaluated, and the end-to-end fully-automatic deep learning pipeline was compared to conventional user-assisted DENSE analysis using linear correlation and Bland Altman analysis of circumferential strain. RESULTS: LV myocardial segmentation U-Nets achieved a DICE similarity coefficient of 0.87 ± 0.04, a Hausdorff distance of 2.7 ± 1.0 pixels, and a mean surface distance of 0.41 ± 0.29 pixels in comparison with manual LV myocardial segmentation by an expert. The anterior RV-LV insertion point was detected within 1.38 ± 0.9 pixels compared to manually annotated data. The phase-unwrapping U-Net had similar or lower mean squared error vs. ground-truth data compared to the conventional path-following method for images with typical signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) or low SNR (p < 0.05), respectively. Bland-Altman analyses showed biases of 0.00 ± 0.03 and limits of agreement of - 0.04 to 0.05 or better for deep learning-based fully-automatic global and segmental end-systolic circumferential strain vs. conventional user-assisted methods. CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning enables fully-automatic global and segmental circumferential strain analysis of DENSE CMR providing excellent agreement with conventional user-assisted methods. Deep learning-based automatic strain analysis may facilitate greater clinical use of DENSE for the quantification of global and segmental strain in patients with cardiac disease.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cardiac MRI; DENSE; Deep learning; Global strain; Heart; Machine learning; Phase unwrapping; Segmental strain; Strain analysis
Authors: Ahmed S Fahmy; Ulf Neisius; Raymond H Chan; Ethan J Rowin; Warren J Manning; Martin S Maron; Reza Nezafat Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-11-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kenneth C Bilchick; Daniel A Auger; Mohammad Abdishektaei; Roshin Mathew; Min-Woong Sohn; Xiaoying Cai; Changyu Sun; Aditya Narayan; Rohit Malhotra; Andrew Darby; J Michael Mangrum; Nishaki Mehta; John Ferguson; Sula Mazimba; Pamela K Mason; Christopher M Kramer; Wayne C Levy; Frederick H Epstein Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-12-18
Authors: Jonathan D Suever; Gregory J Wehner; Christopher M Haggerty; Linyuan Jing; Sean M Hamlet; Cassi M Binkley; Sage P Kramer; Andrea C Mattingly; David K Powell; Kenneth C Bilchick; Frederick H Epstein; Brandon K Fornwalt Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2014-11-28 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Linyuan Jing; Cassi M Binkley; Jonathan D Suever; Nivedita Umasankar; Christopher M Haggerty; Jennifer Rich; Gregory J Wehner; Sean M Hamlet; David K Powell; Aurelia Radulescu; H Lester Kirchner; Frederick H Epstein; Brandon K Fornwalt Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2016-05-11 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Xiao Chen; Yang Yang; Xiaoying Cai; Daniel A Auger; Craig H Meyer; Michael Salerno; Frederick H Epstein Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2016-06-14 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Vincent Chen; Alex J Barker; Rotem Golan; Michael B Scott; Hyungkyu Huh; Qiao Wei; Alireza Sojoudi; Michael Markl Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Mohamad Abdi; Xue Feng; Changyu Sun; Kenneth C Bilchick; Craig H Meyer; Frederick H Epstein Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-05-22 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Daniel A Auger; Sona Ghadimi; Xiaoying Cai; Claire E Reagan; Changyu Sun; Mohamad Abdi; Jie Jane Cao; Joshua Y Cheng; Nora Ngai; Andrew D Scott; Pedro F Ferreira; John N Oshinski; Nick Emamifar; Daniel B Ennis; Michael Loecher; Zhan-Qiu Liu; Pierre Croisille; Magalie Viallon; Kenneth C Bilchick; Frederick H Epstein Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2022-04-04 Impact factor: 6.903