Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct;64(10):2077-2083.
doi: 10.1007/s00234-022-03024-6. Epub 2022 Aug 3.

Deep learning reconstruction for the evaluation of neuroforaminal stenosis using 1.5T cervical spine MRI: comparison with 3T MRI without deep learning reconstruction

Koichiro Yasaka  1   2 , Tomoya Tanishima  1 , Yuta Ohtake  1 , Taku Tajima  3 , Hiroyuki Akai  2   4 , Kuni Ohtomo  5 , Osamu Abe  1 , Shigeru Kiryu  6
Affiliations

Deep learning reconstruction for the evaluation of neuroforaminal stenosis using 1.5T cervical spine MRI: comparison with 3T MRI without deep learning reconstruction

Koichiro Yasaka et al. Neuroradiology. 2022 Oct.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare image quality and interobserver agreement in evaluations of neuroforaminal stenosis between 1.5T cervical spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) and 3T MRI without DLR.

Methods: In this prospective study, 21 volunteers (mean age: 42.4 ± 11.9 years; 17 males) underwent cervical spine T2-weighted sagittal 1.5T and 3T MRI on the same day. The 1.5T and 3T MRI data were used to reconstruct images with (1.5T-DLR) and without (3T-nonDLR) DLR, respectively. Regions of interest were marked on the spinal cord to calculate non-uniformity (NU; standard deviation/signal intensity × 100), as an indicator of image noise. Two blinded radiologists evaluated the images in terms of the depiction of structures, artifacts, noise, overall image quality, and neuroforaminal stenosis. The NU value and the subjective image quality scores were compared between 1.5T-DLR and 3T-nonDLR using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Interobserver agreement in evaluations of neuroforaminal stenosis for 1.5T-DLR and 3T-nonDLR was evaluated using Cohen's weighted kappa analysis.

Results: The NU value for 1.5T-DLR was 8.4, which was significantly better than that for 3T-nonDLR (10.3; p < 0.001). Subjective image scores were significantly better for 1.5T-DLR than 3T-nonDLR images (p < 0.037). Interobserver agreement (95% confidence intervals) in the evaluations of neuroforaminal stenosis was significantly superior for 1.5T-DLR (0.920 [0.916-0.924]) than 3T-nonDLR (0.894 [0.889-0.898]).

Conclusion: By using DLR, image quality and interobserver agreement in evaluations of neuroforaminal stenosis on 1.5T cervical spine MRI could be improved compared to 3T MRI without DLR.

Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Cervical vertebrae; Deep learning; Magnetic resonance imaging.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Brinjikji W, Luetmer PH, Comstock B et al (2015) Systematic literature review of imaging features of spinal degeneration in asymptomatic populations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 36(4):811–816 - DOI
    1. Theodore N (2020) Degenerative cervical spondylosis. N Engl J Med 383(2):159–168 - DOI
    1. Radhakrishnan K, Litchy WJ, O’Fallon WM, Kurland LT (1994) Epidemiology of cervical radiculopathy. A population-based study from Rochester, Minnesota, 1976 through 1990. Brain 117(Pt 2):325–335 - DOI
    1. Voorhies RM (2001) Cervical spondylosis: recognition, differential diagnosis, and management. Ochsner J 3(2):78–84 - PubMed - PMC
    1. Korzan JR, Gorassini M, Emery D, Taher ZA, Beaulieu C (2002) In vivo magnetic resonance imaging of the human cervical spinal cord at 3 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 16(1):21–27 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources