Deep learning reconstruction for prostate MRI: Impact of field-of-view selection on global and regional image quality

Purpose: To compare global and region-specific image quality in deep learning-based prostate MRI reconstructions and determine whether global assessments mask localized degradations in diagnostically relevant areas. Methods: This retrospective study included 3.0 T T2-weighted prostate k-space data from the University Medical Center Groningen, with 63 lesions (PI-RADS ≥ 3) segmented by a radiologist. Scans were accelerated three-fold (R=3) and six-fold (R=6) using a state-of-the-art deep learning (DL) reconstruction model (vSHARP). Image quality was evaluated using the Structural Similarity Index Measure (SSIM) across the entire clinical FOV and in region-specific (diagnostic) FOVs, defined as normal prostate tissue and prostate lesion areas, as well as in non-diagnostic reference regions (muscle, femur, and subcutaneous fat). Nonparametric tests and linear mixed-effects models assessed differences in visual quality between FOVs and characterized degradation patterns with increased acceleration. Results: The clinical FOV maintained stable image quality, with SSIM values of 0.88 ± 0.06 at R= 3 and 0.86 ± 0.06 at R= 6. In contrast, region-specific (diagnostic) FOVs exhibited significant degradation, with prostate lesions SSIM of 0.67 ± 0.10 at R= 3 and 0.61 ± 0.10 at R= 6 (p < 0.001). Regression analysis confirmed that quality loss was significantly greater in the region-specific compared to the clinical FOV (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The current evaluation standard—SSIM over the entire clinical FOV—fails to capture region-specific degradations in diagnostic areas. Our findings reveal that assessments on diagnostic regions expose significantly greater quality loss with increased acceleration, highlighting the need to integrate region-specific quality metrics into DL reconstruction evaluation frameworks. • AI reconstruction shows faster quality loss in diagnostically relevant regions. • Prostate and lesion areas exhibit lower image quality than uniform tissues. • Global image quality metrics mask regional degradation in accelerated prostate MRI. • Segmentation standardizes region extraction, enabling objective quality comparisons.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Radiology Artificial Intelligence
Published
2025-04-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrai.2025.100017
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.36
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Deep learning reconstruction for prostate MRI: Impact of field-of-view selection on global and regional image quality

Thomas C. Kwee, Stefan J. Fransen, Quintin van Lohuizen, HenkJan J. Huisman et al.
1 citations
European Journal of Radiology Artificial Intelligence
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
1.36
article

Deep learning reconstruction for prostate MRI: Impact of field-of-view selection on global and regional image quality

Thomas C. Kwee, Stefan J. Fransen, Quintin van Lohuizen, HenkJan J. Huisman, Christian Roest, Frank F.J. Simonis, George Yiasemis, Derya Yakar
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Purpose: To compare global and region-specific image quality in deep learning-based prostate MRI reconstructions and determine whether global assessments mask localized degradations in diagnostically relevant areas. Methods: This retrospective study included 3.0 T T2-weighted prostate k-space data from the University Medical Center Groningen, with 63 lesions (PI-RADS ≥ 3) segmented by a radiologist. Scans were accelerated three-fold (R=3) and six-fold (R=6) using a state-of-the-art deep learning (DL) reconstruction model (vSHARP). Image quality was evaluated using the Structural Similarity Index Measure (SSIM) across the entire clinical FOV and in region-specific (diagnostic) FOVs, defined as normal prostate tissue and prostate lesion areas, as well as in non-diagnostic reference regions (muscle, femur, and subcutaneous fat). Nonparametric tests and linear mixed-effects models assessed differences in visual quality between FOVs and characterized degradation patterns with increased acceleration. Results: The clinical FOV maintained stable image quality, with SSIM values of 0.88 ± 0.06 at R= 3 and 0.86 ± 0.06 at R= 6. In contrast, region-specific (diagnostic) FOVs exhibited significant degradation, with prostate lesions SSIM of 0.67 ± 0.10 at R= 3 and 0.61 ± 0.10 at R= 6 (p < 0.001). Regression analysis confirmed that quality loss was significantly greater in the region-specific compared to the clinical FOV (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The current evaluation standard—SSIM over the entire clinical FOV—fails to capture region-specific degradations in diagnostic areas. Our findings reveal that assessments on diagnostic regions expose significantly greater quality loss with increased acceleration, highlighting the need to integrate region-specific quality metrics into DL reconstruction evaluation frameworks. • AI reconstruction shows faster quality loss in diagnostically relevant regions. • Prostate and lesion areas exhibit lower image quality than uniform tissues. • Global image quality metrics mask regional degradation in accelerated prostate MRI. • Segmentation standardizes region extraction, enabling objective quality comparisons.

European Journal of Radiology Artificial IntelligenceVol. 2
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
1.36
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.