A Machine Learning Approach to Perfusion Imaging With Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast MR

Background: Dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MR perfusion is a frequently-used technique for neurovascular imaging. The progress of a bolus of contrast agent through the tissue of the brain is imaged via a series of T2*-weighted MRI scans. Clinically relevant parameters such as blood flow and Tmax can be calculated by deconvolving the contrast-time curves with the bolus shape (arterial input function). In acute stroke, for instance, these parameters may help distinguish between the likely salvageable tissue and irreversibly damaged infarct core. Deconvolution typically relies on singular value decomposition (SVD): however, studies have shown that these algorithms are very sensitive to noise and artifacts present in the image and therefore may introduce distortions that influence the estimated output parameters. Methods: In this work, we present a machine learning approach to the estimation of perfusion parameters in DSC-MRI. Various machine learning models using as input the raw MR source data were trained to reproduce the output of an FDA approved commercial implementation of the SVD deconvolution algorithm. Experiments were conducted to determine the effect of training set size, optimal patch size, and the effect of using different machine-learning models for regression. Results: Model performance increased with training set size, but after 5,000 samples (voxels) this effect was minimal. Models inferring perfusion maps from a 5 by 5 voxel patch outperformed models able to use the information in a single voxel, but larger patches led to worse performance. Random Forest models produced had the lowest root mean squared error, with neural networks performing second best: however, a phantom study revealed that the random forest was highly susceptible to noise levels, while the neural network was more robust. Conclusion: The machine learning-based approach produces estimates of the perfusion parameters invariant to the noise and artifacts that commonly occur as part of MR acquisition. As a result, better robustness to noise is obtained, when evaluated against the FDA approved software on acute stroke patients and simulated phantom data.

[1]  Roland Bammer,et al.  Geography, Structure, and Evolution of Diffusion and Perfusion Lesions in Diffusion and Perfusion Imaging Evaluation For Understanding Stroke Evolution (DEFUSE) , 2009, Stroke.

[2]  M. Essig,et al.  Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked technical questions. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  Mayank Goyal,et al.  Collateral Circulation in Ischemic Stroke Assessment Tools and Therapeutic Strategies , 2022 .

[4]  G. Schlaug,et al.  The ischemic penumbra: operationally defined by diffusion and perfusion MRI. , 1999, Neurology.

[5]  T. Farr,et al.  Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Predict Outcome after Stroke: A Review of Experimental and Clinical Evidence , 2010, Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[6]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Bayesian estimation of cerebral perfusion using a physiological model of microvasculature , 2006, NeuroImage.

[7]  Fabien Scalzo,et al.  Prediction of Hemorrhagic Transformation Severity in Acute Stroke From Source Perfusion MRI , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[8]  Xiao Hu,et al.  Regional Prediction of Tissue Fate in Acute Ischemic Stroke , 2012, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  Michael D. Hill,et al.  Perfusion MRI Abnormalities in Speech or Motor Transient Ischemic Attack Patients , 2005, Stroke.

[10]  B. Rosen,et al.  Tracer arrival timing‐insensitive technique for estimating flow in MR perfusion‐weighted imaging using singular value decomposition with a block‐circulant deconvolution matrix , 2003, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[11]  S. Chatterjee,et al.  Influential Observations, High Leverage Points, and Outliers in Linear Regression , 1986 .

[12]  Hiroki Shirato,et al.  Differences in CT perfusion maps generated by different commercial software: quantitative analysis by using identical source data of acute stroke patients. , 2010, Radiology.

[13]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, 2nd Edition , 2001, Springer Series in Statistics.

[14]  D. Gadian,et al.  Quantification of bolus‐tracking MRI: Improved characterization of the tissue residue function using Tikhonov regularization , 2003, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[15]  John Platt,et al.  Probabilistic Outputs for Support vector Machines and Comparisons to Regularized Likelihood Methods , 1999 .

[16]  Torbjörn Falkmer,et al.  The Case for Using the Repeatability Coefficient When Calculating Test–Retest Reliability , 2013, PloS one.

[17]  Makoto Sasaki,et al.  Bayesian Hemodynamic Parameter Estimation by Bolus Tracking Perfusion Weighted Imaging , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[18]  M P Lichy,et al.  Diagnostic performance of spectroscopic and perfusion MRI for distinction of brain tumors , 2006, Neurology.

[19]  Teng-Fei Li,et al.  Perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of haemodynamics following stent angioplasty in patients with symptomatic middle cerebral artery plaque stenosis at the M1 segment , 2017, Experimental and therapeutic medicine.

[20]  C. Rasmussen,et al.  Perfusion quantification using Gaussian process deconvolution , 2002, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[21]  Wei-Yin Loh,et al.  Classification and regression trees , 2011, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

[22]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines , 2011, TIST.

[23]  Jan Sobesky,et al.  Identifying Thresholds for Penumbra and Irreversible Tissue Damage , 2004, Stroke.

[24]  S. Bauer,et al.  Fully automated stroke tissue estimation using random forest classifiers (FASTER) , 2017, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[25]  Max Wintermark,et al.  Understanding the Neurophysiology and Quantification of Brain Perfusion , 2017, Topics in magnetic resonance imaging : TMRI.

[26]  M. Viergever,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation of cerebral blood flow in dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[27]  Glyn Johnson,et al.  Treatment-related change versus tumor recurrence in high-grade gliomas: a diagnostic conundrum--use of dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced (DSC) perfusion MRI. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[28]  Fabien Scalzo,et al.  Deep learning of tissue fate features in acute ischemic stroke , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM).

[29]  Huiman X Barnhart,et al.  Applications of the repeatability of quantitative imaging biomarkers: a review of statistical analysis of repeat data sets. , 2009, Translational oncology.