Abstract:Background: Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) of the myocardium has significant diagnostic and prognostic implications, with even small areas of enhancement being important. Distinguishing between definitely normal and definitely abnormal LGE images is usually straightforward, but diagnostic uncertainty arises when reporters are not sure whether the observed LGE is genuine or not. This uncertainty might be resolved by repetition (to remove artifact) or further acquisition of intersecting images, but this must take place before the scan finishes. Real-time quality assurance by humans is a complex task requiring training and experience, so being able to identify which images have an intermediate likelihood of LGE while the scan is ongoing, without the presence of an expert is of high value. This decision-support could prompt immediate image optimization or acquisition of supplementary images to confirm or refute the presence of genuine LGE. This could reduce ambiguity in reports. Methods: Short-axis, phase-sensitive inversion recovery late gadolinium images were extracted from our clinical cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) database and shuffled. Two, independent, blinded experts scored each individual slice for "LGE likelihood" on a visual analog scale, from 0 (absolute certainty of no LGE) to 100 (absolute certainty of LGE), with 50 representing clinical equipoise. The scored images were split into two classes-either "high certainty" of whether LGE was present or not, or "low certainty." The dataset was split into training, validation, and test sets (70:15:15). A deep learning binary classifier based on the EfficientNetV2 convolutional neural network architecture was trained to distinguish between these categories. Classifier performance on the test set was evaluated by calculating the accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC AUC). Performance was also evaluated on an external test set of images from a different center. Results: One thousand six hundred and forty-five images (from 272 patients) were labeled and split at the patient level into training (1151 images), validation (247 images), and test (247 images) sets for the deep learning binary classifier. Of these, 1208 images were "high certainty" (255 for LGE, 953 for no LGE), and 437 were "low certainty". An external test comprising 247 images from 41 patients from another center was also employed. After 100 epochs, the performance on the internal test set was accuracy = 0.94, recall = 0.80, precision = 0.97, F1-score = 0.87, and ROC AUC = 0.94. The classifier also performed robustly on the external test set (accuracy = 0.91, recall = 0.73, precision = 0.93, F1-score = 0.82, and ROC AUC = 0.91). These results were benchmarked against a reference inter-expert accuracy of 0.86. Conclusion: Deep learning shows potential to automate quality control of late gadolinium imaging in CMR. The ability to identify short-axis images with intermediate LGE likelihood in real-time may serve as a useful decision-support tool. This approach has the potential to guide immediate further imaging while the patient is still in the scanner, thereby reducing the frequency of recalls and inconclusive reports due to diagnostic indecision.

Quality assurance of late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance images: a deep learning classifier for confidence in the presence or absence of abnormality with potential to prompt real-time image optimization

A Fully Automated Two-Stage Segmentation Approach for Late Gadolinium-Enhanced Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Images in Personalized Cardiac Modeling

Quality control-driven deep ensemble for accountable automated segmentation of cardiac magnetic resonance LGE and VNE images

Predicting Late Gadolinium Enhancement of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Contrast-Free Cardiac Cine MRI Using Deep Generative Learning

Two-Stage Deep Learning Framework for Quality Assessment of Left Atrial Late Gadolinium Enhanced MRI Images

Deep learning of echocardiography distinguishes between presence and absence of late gadolinium enhancement on cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

[Development of a Deep Learning Model for Judging Late Gadolinium-enhancement in Cardiac MRI]

Towards Replacing Late Gadolinium Enhancement with Artificial Intelligence Virtual Native Enhancement for Gadolinium-Free Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Tissue Characterization in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

Anatomically informed deep learning on contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for scar segmentation and clinical feature extraction

Improvement of late gadolinium enhancement image quality using a deep learning–based reconstruction algorithm and its influence on myocardial scar quantification

Deep Learning for Accurate Diagnosis of Liver Tumor Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Data

Deep neural models for automated multi-task diagnostic scan management—quality enhancement, view classification and report generation

Deep Learning for Diagnosis of Chronic Myocardial Infarction on Nonenhanced Cardiac Cine MRI.

A Comprehensive 3-D Framework for Automatic Quantification of Late Gadolinium Enhanced Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Images

Evaluation of deep learning-based reconstruction late gadolinium enhancement images for identifying patients with clinically unrecognized myocardial infarction

Segmentation of the Myocardium on Late-Gadolinium Enhanced MRI based on 2.5 D Residual Squeeze and Excitation Deep Learning Model

Learning-Based Quality Control for Cardiac MR Images

Myocardial Infarction Quantification From Late Gadolinium Enhancement MRI Using Top-hat Transforms and Neural Networks

Anatomically-Informed Deep Learning on Contrast-Enhanced Cardiac MRI for Scar Segmentation and Clinical Feature Extraction

Assessing the deep learning based image quality enhancements for the BGO based GE omni legend PET/CT

A new automatic algorithm for quantification of myocardial infarction imaged by late gadolinium enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance: experimental validation and comparison to expert delineations in multi-center, multi-vendor patient data