4Dflow‐VP‐Net: A deep convolutional neural network for noninvasive estimation of relative pressures in stenotic flows from 4D flow MRI

• Published in: Magnetic resonance in medicine 2023-11, Vol.90 (5), p.2175-2189
• Main Authors: Nath, Ruponti, Kazemi, Amirkhosro, Callahan, Sean, Stoddard, Marcus F., Amini, Amir A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 4D flow MRI; Aorta; Aortic stenosis; Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnostic imaging; Artificial neural networks; Blood Flow Velocity; Computational fluid dynamics; Constriction, Pathologic - diagnostic imaging; convolutional neural network; Correlation coefficient; Correlation coefficients; Deep learning; Doppler effect; Echocardiography; Flow simulation; Flow velocity; Fluid dynamics; Humans; Hydrodynamics; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods; Machine learning; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Medical instruments; Neural networks; Neural Networks, Computer; Pressure; pressure gradient; Pressure measurement; Velocity; Waveforms
• ISSN: 0740-3194; 1522-2594; 1522-2594
• DOI: 10.1002/mrm.29791

Purpose To estimate relative transvalvular pressure gradient (TVPG) noninvasively from 4D flow MRI. Methods A novel deep learning–based approach is proposed to estimate pressure gradient across stenosis from four‐dimensional flow MRI (4D flow MRI) velocities. A deep neural network 4D flow Velocity‐to‐Presure Network (4Dflow‐VP‐Net) was trained to learn the spatiotemporal relationship between velocities and pressure in stenotic vessels. Training data were simulated by computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for different pulsatile flow conditions under an aortic flow waveform. The network was tested to predict pressure from CFD‐simulated velocity data, in vitro 4D flow MRI data, and in vivo 4D flow MRI data of patients with both moderate and severe aortic stenosis. TVPG derived from 4Dflow‐VP‐Net was compared to catheter‐based pressure measurements for available flow rates, in vitro and Doppler echocardiography–based pressure measurement, in vivo. Results Relative pressures calculated by 4Dflow‐VP‐Net and in vitro pressure catheterization revealed strong correlation (r2 = 0.91). Correlations analysis of TVPG from reference CFD and 4Dflow‐VP‐Net for 450 simulated flow conditions showed strong correlation (r2 = 0.99). TVPG from in vitro MRI had a correlation coefficient of r2 = 0.98 with reference CFD. 4Dflow‐VP‐Net, applied to 4D flow MRI in 16 patients, showed comparable TVPG measurement with Doppler echocardiography (r2 = 0.85). Bland–Altman analysis of TVPG measurements showed mean bias and limits of agreement of −0.20 ± 2.07 mmHg and 0.19 ± 0.45 mmHg for CFD‐simulated velocities and in vitro 4D flow velocities. In patients, overestimation of Doppler echocardiography relative to TVPG from 4Dflow‐VP‐Net (10.99 ± 6.77 mmHg) was observed. Conclusion The proposed approach can predict relative pressure in both in vitro and in vivo 4D flow MRI of aortic stenotic patients with high fidelity.