4.6 Article

Accelerated cardiac diffusion tensor imaging using deep neural network

期刊

PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
卷 68, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/acaa86

关键词

deep learning; cardiac diffusion tensor imaging (DTI); convolutional neural network

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a deep learning framework called FG-Net was developed to generate high-quality DTI parameter maps from six DWIs. Compared to previous fast DTI studies, FG-Net improves estimation accuracy by generating inter-directional DWIs to supplement loss information. Evaluation results demonstrated that FG-Net can generate accurate parameter maps with less than 5% quantification error. FG-Net outperformed conventional tensor fitting and black-box network fitting in both qualitative and quantitative metrics.
Cardiac diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) is a noninvasive method for measuring the microstructure of the myocardium. However, its long scan time significantly hinders its wide application. In this study, we developed a deep learning framework to obtain high-quality DTI parameter maps from six diffusion-weighted images (DWIs) by combining deep-learning-based image generation and tensor fitting, and named the new framework FG-Net. In contrast to frameworks explored in previous deep-learning-based fast DTI studies, FG-Net generates inter-directional DWIs from six input DWIs to supplement the loss information and improve estimation accuracy for DTI parameters. FG-Net was evaluated using two datasets of ex vivo human hearts. The results showed that FG-Net can generate fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity maps, and helix angle maps from only six raw DWIs, with a quantification error of less than 5%. FG-Net outperformed conventional tensor fitting and black-box network fitting in both qualitative and quantitative metrics. We also demonstrated that the proposed FG-Net can achieve highly accurate fractional anisotropy and helix angle maps in DWIs with different b-values.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据