Comparison of 1.5 T and 3 T magnetic resonance angiography for detecting cerebral aneurysms using deep learning-based computer-assisted detection software

Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of 1.5 T versus 3 T magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for detecting cerebral aneurysms with clinically available deep learning-based computer-assisted detection software (EIRL aneurysm® [EIRL_an]), which has been approved by the Japanese Pharmaceutica...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Neuroradiology 2023-10, Vol.65 (10), p.1473-1482
Main Authors: Tajima, Taku, Akai, Hiroyuki, Yasaka, Koichiro, Kunimatsu, Akira, Yoshioka, Naoki, Akahane, Masaaki, Ohtomo, Kuni, Abe, Osamu, Kiryu, Shigeru
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Algorithms
Aneurysm
Aneurysms
Angiography
Arteriosclerosis
Atherosclerosis
Chi-square test
Deep learning
Diagnostic Neuroradiology
Imaging
Magnetic resonance
Medical devices
Medical equipment
Medical imaging
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Neurology
Neuroradiology
Neurosciences
Neurosurgery
Patients
Radiology
Software
Statistical analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of 1.5 T versus 3 T magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for detecting cerebral aneurysms with clinically available deep learning-based computer-assisted detection software (EIRL aneurysm® [EIRL_an]), which has been approved by the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. We also sought to analyze the causes of potential false positives. Methods In this single-center, retrospective study, we evaluated the MRA scans of 90 patients who underwent head MRA (1.5 T and 3 T in 45 patients each) in clinical practice. Overall, 51 patients had 70 aneurysms. We used MRI from a vendor not included in the dataset used to create the EIRL_an algorithm. Two radiologists determined the ground truth, the accuracy of the candidates noted by EIRL_an, and the causes of false positives. The sensitivity, number of false positives per case (FPs/case), and the causes of false positives were compared between 1.5 T and 3 T MRA. Pearson’s χ 2 test, Fisher’s exact test, and the Mann‒Whitney U test were used for the statistical analyses as appropriate. Results The sensitivity was high for 1.5 T and 3 T MRA (0.875‒1), but the number of FPs/case was significantly higher with 3 T MRA (1.511 vs. 2.578, p  
ISSN:0028-3940
1432-1920
DOI:10.1007/s00234-023-03216-8