Literature DB >> 36042118

Automated Protocoling for MRI Exams-Challenges and Solutions.

Jonas Denck1,2,3, Oliver Haas4,5, Jens Guehring6, Andreas Maier4, Eva Rothgang5.   

Abstract

Automated protocoling for MRI examinations is an amendable target for workflow automation with artificial intelligence. However, there are still challenges to overcome for a successful and robust approach. These challenges are outlined and analyzed in this work. Through a literature review, we analyzed limitations of currently published approaches for automated protocoling. Then, we assessed these limitations quantitatively based on data from a private radiology practice. For this, we assessed the information content provided by the clinical indication by computing the overlap coefficients for the sets of ICD-10-coded admitting diagnoses of different MRI protocols. Additionally, we assessed the heterogeneity of protocol trees from three different MRI scanners based on the overlap coefficient, on MRI protocol and sequence level. Additionally, we applied sequence name standardization to demonstrate its effect on the heterogeneity assessment, i.e., the overlap coefficient, of different protocol trees. The overlap coefficient for the set of ICD-10-coded admitting diagnoses for different protocols ranges from 0.14 to 0.56 for brain/head MRI exams and 0.04 to 0.57 for spine exams. The overlap coefficient across the set of sequences used at two different scanners increases when applying sequence name standardization (from 0.81/0.86 to 0.93). Automated protocoling for MRI examinations has the potential to reduce the workload for radiologists. However, an automated protocoling approach cannot be solely based on admitting diagnosis as it does not provide sufficient information. Moreover, sequence name standardization increases the overlap coefficient across the set of sequences used at different scanners and therefore facilitates transfer learning.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Automated order entry; Automated protocoling; Machine learning; Magnetic resonance imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36042118      PMCID: PMC9582071          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-022-00610-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.903


  29 in total

Review 1.  First principles of fast spin echo.

Authors:  J Listerud; S Einstein; E Outwater; H Y Kressel
Journal:  Magn Reson Q       Date:  1992-12

2.  Identification of Neuroradiology MRI Protocol Errors via a Quality-Driven Categorization Approach.

Authors:  Daniel Thomas Ginat; Pranay Uppuluri; Gregory Christoforidis; Gregory Katzman; Seon-Kyu Lee
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2015-10-23       Impact factor: 5.532

3.  Trends in the utilization of medical imaging from 2003 to 2011: clinical encounters offer a complementary patient-centered focus.

Authors:  Martey S Dodoo; Richard Duszak; Danny R Hughes
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.532

4.  Integrity of clinical information in computerized order requisitions for diagnostic imaging.

Authors:  Ronilda Lacson; Romeo Laroya; Aijia Wang; Neena Kapoor; Daniel I Glazer; Atul Shinagare; Ivan K Ip; Sameer Malhotra; Keith Hentel; Ramin Khorasani
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  A Natural Language Processing-based Model to Automate MRI Brain Protocol Selection and Prioritization.

Authors:  Andrew D Brown; Thomas R Marotta
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 6.  Abbreviated MRI Protocols: Wave of the Future for Breast Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Chloe M Chhor; Cecilia L Mercado
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Radiology Workflow Disruptors: A Detailed Analysis.

Authors:  Andrew Schemmel; Matthew Lee; Taylor Hanley; B Dustin Pooler; Tabassum Kennedy; Aaron Field; Douglas Wiegmann; John-Paul J Yu
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 5.532

8.  Order Entry Protocols Are an Amenable Target for Workflow Automation.

Authors:  James Tudor; Chad Klochko; Milind Patel; Daniel Siegal
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2018-04-22       Impact factor: 5.532

9.  CT and MR Protocol Standardization Across a Large Health System: Providing a Consistent Radiologist, Patient, and Referring Provider Experience.

Authors:  Peter B Sachs; Kelly Hunt; Fabien Mansoubi; James Borgstede
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 4.056

10.  Comparative analysis of Medicare spending for medical imaging: sustained dramatic slowdown compared with other services.

Authors:  David W Lee; Richard Duszak; Danny R Hughes
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.959

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.