Feasibility of Deep Learning–Based PET/MR Attenuation Correction in the Pelvis Using Only Diagnostic MR Images

This study evaluated the feasibility of using only diagnostically relevant magnetic resonance (MR) images together with deep learning for positron emission tomography (PET)/MR attenuation correction (deepMRAC) in the pelvis. Such an approach could eliminate dedicated MRAC sequences that have limited diagnostic utility but can substantially lengthen acquisition times for multibed position scans. We used axial T2 and T1 LAVA Flex magnetic resonance imaging images that were acquired for diagnostic purposes as inputs to a 3D deep convolutional neural network. The network was trained to produce a discretized (air, water, fat, and bone) substitute computed tomography (CT) (CTsub). Discretized (CTref-discrete) and continuously valued (CTref) reference CT images were created to serve as ground truth for network training and attenuation correction, respectively. Training was performed with data from 12 subjects. CTsub, CTref, and the system MRAC were used for PET/MR attenuation correction, and quantitative PET values of the resulting images were compared in 6 test subjects. Overall, the network produced CTsub with Dice coefficients of 0.79 ± 0.03 for cortical bone, 0.98 ± 0.01 for soft tissue (fat: 0.94 ± 0.0; water: 0.88 ± 0.02), and 0.49 ± 0.17 for bowel gas when compared with CTref-discrete. The root mean square error of the whole PET image was 4.9% by using deepMRAC and 11.6% by using the system MRAC. In evaluating 16 soft tissue lesions, the distribution of errors for maximum standardized uptake value was significantly narrower using deepMRAC (−1.0% ± 1.3%) than using system MRAC method (0.0% ± 6.4%) according to the Brown–Forsy the test (P < .05). These results indicate that improved PET/MR attenuation correction can be achieved in the pelvis using only diagnostically relevant MR images.

[1]  Robert Jeraj,et al.  Development and evaluation of an articulated registration algorithm for human skeleton registration , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  Z. Fayad,et al.  Simultaneous carotid PET/MR: feasibility and improvement of magnetic resonance-based attenuation correction , 2015, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[3]  H. Zaidi,et al.  Vision 20/20: Magnetic resonance imaging-guided attenuation correction in PET/MRI: Challenges, solutions, and opportunities. , 2016, Medical physics.

[4]  Yaozong Gao,et al.  Estimating CT Image From MRI Data Using Structured Random Forest and Auto-Context Model , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[5]  Ronald M. Summers,et al.  Machine learning and radiology , 2012, Medical Image Anal..

[6]  H. Zaidi,et al.  Design and performance evaluation of a whole-body Ingenuity TF PET–MRI system , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.

[7]  N. Alpert,et al.  Bias Atlases for Segmentation-Based PET Attenuation Correction Using PET-CT and MR , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[8]  Jurgen Fripp,et al.  Automatic Substitute Computed Tomography Generation and Contouring for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Alone External Beam Radiation Therapy From Standard MRI Sequences. , 2015, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  Ninon Burgos,et al.  A multi-centre evaluation of eleven clinically feasible brain PET/MRI attenuation correction techniques using a large cohort of patients , 2016, NeuroImage.

[10]  N. Schwenzer,et al.  Quantitative Evaluation of Segmentation- and Atlas-Based Attenuation Correction for PET/MR on Pediatric Patients , 2015, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[11]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[12]  G. Hermosillo,et al.  Whole-Body PET/MR Imaging: Quantitative Evaluation of a Novel Model-Based MR Attenuation Correction Method Including Bone , 2015, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[13]  Brian B. Avants,et al.  The Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS) , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[14]  G. Delso,et al.  Performance Measurements of the Siemens mMR Integrated Whole-Body PET/MR Scanner , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[15]  Til Aach,et al.  Simultaneous Reconstruction of Activity and Attenuation for PET/MR , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[16]  Carri Glide-Hurst,et al.  Implementation of a novel algorithm for generating synthetic CT images from magnetic resonance imaging data sets for prostate cancer radiation therapy. , 2015, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[17]  I. Burger,et al.  PET/MR imaging of bone lesions – implications for PET quantification from imperfect attenuation correction , 2012, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[18]  Konstantinos Kamnitsas,et al.  Efficient multi‐scale 3D CNN with fully connected CRF for accurate brain lesion segmentation , 2016, Medical Image Anal..

[19]  B. Schölkopf,et al.  Towards quantitative PET/MRI: a review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques , 2009, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[20]  Tiina Seppälä,et al.  A dual model HU conversion from MRI intensity values within and outside of bone segment for MRI-based radiotherapy treatment planning of prostate cancer. , 2013, Medical physics.

[21]  Habib Zaidi,et al.  Clinical Assessment of Emission- and Segmentation-Based MR-Guided Attenuation Correction in Whole-Body Time-of-Flight PET/MR Imaging , 2015, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[22]  et al.,et al.  ISLES 2015 ‐ A public evaluation benchmark for ischemic stroke lesion segmentation from multispectral MRI , 2017, Medical Image Anal..

[23]  Konstantinos Kamnitsas,et al.  Ensembles of Multiple Models and Architectures for Robust Brain Tumour Segmentation , 2017, BrainLes@MICCAI.

[24]  Andrew P. Leynes,et al.  Hybrid ZTE/Dixon MR‐based attenuation correction for quantitative uptake estimation of pelvic lesions in PET/MRI , 2017, Medical physics.

[25]  Fang Liu,et al.  Technical Note: Deep learning based MRAC using rapid ultrashort echo time imaging , 2018, Medical physics.

[26]  Fang Liu,et al.  Rapid dual‐echo ramped hybrid encoding MR‐based attenuation correction (dRHE‐MRAC) for PET/MR , 2018, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[27]  Nassir Navab,et al.  Tissue Classification as a Potential Approach for Attenuation Correction in Whole-Body PET/MRI: Evaluation with PET/CT Data , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[28]  Hao Chen,et al.  3D deeply supervised network for automated segmentation of volumetric medical images , 2017, Medical Image Anal..

[29]  A. McMillan,et al.  Deep learning Mr imaging–based attenuation correction for PeT/Mr imaging 1 , 2017 .

[30]  Habib Zaidi,et al.  Whole-body bone segmentation from MRI for PET/MRI attenuation correction using shape-based averaging. , 2016, Medical physics.

[31]  Richard Kijowski,et al.  A deep learning approach for 18F-FDG PET attenuation correction , 2018, EJNMMI Physics.

[32]  J. Czernin,et al.  18F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI Perform Equally Well in Cancer: Evidence from Studies on More Than 2,300 Patients , 2016, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.