Technical challenges of quantitative chest MRI data analysis in a large cohort pediatric study

Abstract

Objectives This study was conducted in order to evaluate the effect of geometric distortion (GD) on MRI lung volume quantification and evaluate available manual, semi-automated, and fully automated methods for lung segmentation. Methods A phantom was scanned with MRI and CT. GD was quantified as the difference in phantom’s volume between MRI and CT, with CT as gold standard. Dice scores were used to measure overlap in shapes. Furthermore, 11 subjects from a prospective population-based cohort study each underwent four chest MRI acquisitions. The resulting 44 MRI scans with 2D and 3D Gradwarp were used to test five segmentation methods. Intraclass correlation coefficient, Bland–Altman plots, Wilcoxon, Mann–Whitney U , and paired t tests were used for statistics. Results Using phantoms, volume differences between CT and MRI varied according to MRI positions and 2D and 3D Gradwarp correction. With the phantom located at the isocenter, MRI overestimated the volume relative to CT by 5.56 ± 1.16 to 6.99 ± 0.22% with body and torso coils, respectively. Higher Dice scores and smaller intraobject differences were found for 3D Gradwarp MR images. In subjects, semi-automated and fully automated segmentation tools showed high agreement with manual segmentations (ICC = 0.971–0.993 for end-inspiratory scans; ICC = 0.992–0.995 for end-expiratory scans). Manual segmentation time per scan was approximately 3–4 h and 2–3 min for fully automated methods. Conclusions Volume overestimation of MRI due to GD can be quantified. Semi-automated and fully automated segmentation methods allow accurate, reproducible, and fast lung volume quantification. Chest MRI can be a valid radiation-free imaging modality for lung segmentation and volume quantification in large cohort studies. Key Points • Geometric distortion varies according to MRI setting and patient positioning. • Automated segmentation methods allow fast and accurate lung volume quantification. • MRI is a valid radiation-free alternative to CT for quantitative data analysis. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-018-5863-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The radiological diagnosis of bronchiectasis: what's in a name?

“…As for CT, consensus on the classification of bronchiectasis is lacking. Furthermore, standardisation across centres and vendors for lung MRI is in its early days [49][50][51]. However, there have been important developments that may significantly contribute to the future of bronchiectasis research, as follows.…”

Practical protocol for lung magnetic resonance imaging and common clinical indications

“…T2-W sequences enable assessment of bronchial wall thickening and mucus plugging. Bronchial wall imaging can be further improved with black-blood preparations [ 10 , 11 ] using heavy T2 weighting (longer effective echo time). Black-blood preparation removes signal of pulmonary vessels, facilitating detection of bronchiectasis, mucus plugging and small nodules.…”

“…Proton-density weighted acquisitions are frequently used to assess airways without the use of contrast agents and air-trapping in end-expiratory images. T1-W is used to assess pulmonary vasculature and lung parenchymal perfusion when combined with contrast administration [9][10][11].…”

Ultrashort echo time MRI of the lung in children and adolescents: comparison with non-enhanced computed tomography and standard post-contrast T1w MRI sequences

“…Further advantages are the possibility to visualise pathologies by using differently weighted sequences and to provide morphologic as well as functional information [ 2 – 5 , 18 , 19 ]. The main issues of lung MRI are low proton density of lung parenchyma and strong magnetic susceptibility effects resulting in short T2 and T2* relaxation times [ 10 , 18 – 22 ]. Further challenges are motion artefacts due to patient movement, cardiac pulsations or respiration, which are particularly problematic for younger children who have high cardiac pulse and respiratory rates as well as low capabilities to cooperate during breath-hold manoeuvres [ 2 , 4 , 23 ].…”