ArticleRadiology advances2024
Quantification of myocardial oxygen extraction fraction on noncontrast MRI enabled by deep learning.
Article in Radiology advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To develop a new deep learning enabled cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) approach for noncontrast quantification of myocardial oxygen extraction fraction (mOEF) and myocardial blood volume (MBV) in vivo. Materials and Methods: An asymmetric spin-echo prepared CMR sequence was created in a 3 T MRI clinical system. A UNet-based fully connected neural network was developed based on a theoretical model of CMR signals to calculate mOEF and MBV. Twenty healthy volunteers (20-30 years old, 11 females) underwent CMR scans at 3 short-axial slices (16 myocardial segments) on 2 different days. The reproducibility was assessed by the coefficient of variation. Ten patients with chronic myocardial infarction were examined to evaluate the feasibility of this CMR method to detect abnormality of mOEF and MBV. Results: Among the volunteers, the average global mOEF and MBV on both days was 0.58 ± 0.07 and 9.5% ± 1.5%, respectively, which agreed well with data measured by other imaging modalities. The coefficient of variation of mOEF was 8.4%, 4.5%, and 2.6%, on a basis of segment, slice, and participant, respectively. No significant difference in mOEF was shown among 3 slices or among different myocardial segments. Female participants showed significantly higher segmental mOEF than male participants ( Conclusion: The new deep learning-enabled CMR approach allows noncontrast quantification of mOEF and MBV with good to excellent reproducibility. This technique could provide an objective contrast-free means to assess and serially measure hypoxia-relief effects of therapeutic interventional strategies to save viable myocardial tissues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.