Lee KC, et al. Korean J Radiol. 2021 Oct;22:e127. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2020.1468

Objective:We evaluated ultrasonographic features of superficial epidermoid tumour with a focus on strain elastography (SE) features that will help in the differential diagnosis of epidermoid tumour...

This study aimed to develop a screening model for rotator cuff tear detection in all three planes of routine shoulder MRI using a deep neural network. A total of 794 shoulder MRI scans (374 men and 420 women; aged 59 ± 11 years) were utilized. Three musculoskeletal radiologists labeled the rotator cuff tear. The YOLO v8 rotator cuff tear detection model was then trained; training was performed with all imaging planes simultaneously and with axial, coronal, and sagittal images separately. The performances of the models were evaluated and compared using receiver operating curves and the area under the curve (AUC). The AUC was the highest when using all imaging planes (0.94; p < 0.05). Among a single imaging plane, the axial plane showed the best performance (AUC: 0.71), followed by the sagittal (AUC: 0.70) and coronal (AUC: 0.68) imaging planes. The sensitivity and accuracy were also the highest in the model with all-plane training (0.98 and 0.96, respectively). Thus, deep-learning-based automatic rotator cuff tear detection can be useful for detecting torn areas in various regions of the rotator cuff in all three imaging planes.

This study aimed to assess the feasibility and performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) model for detecting three common wrist fractures: distal radius, ulnar styloid process, and scaphoid. The AI model was trained with a dataset of 4432 images containing both fractured and non-fractured wrist images. In total, 593 subjects were included in the clinical test. Two human experts independently diagnosed and labeled the fracture sites using bounding boxes to build the ground truth. Two novice radiologists also performed the same task, both with and without model assistance. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated for each wrist location. The AUC for detecting distal radius, ulnar styloid, and scaphoid fractures per wrist were 0.903 (95% C.I. 0.887–0.918), 0.925 (95% C.I. 0.911–0.939), and 0.808 (95% C.I. 0.748–0.967), respectively. When assisted by the AI model, the scaphoid fracture AUC of the two novice radiologists significantly increased from 0.75 (95% C.I. 0.66–0.83) to 0.85 (95% C.I. 0.77–0.93) and from 0.71 (95% C.I. 0.62–0.80) to 0.80 (95% C.I. 0.71–0.88), respectively. Overall, the developed AI model was found to be reliable for detecting wrist fractures, particularly for scaphoid fractures, which are commonly missed.

(1) Introduction: Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) play an important role in the diagnosis and evaluation of spinal diseases, especially degenerative spinal diseases. MRI is mainly used to diagnose most spinal diseases because it shows a higher resolution than CT to distinguish lesions of the spinal canals and intervertebral discs. When it is inevitable for CT to be selected instead of MR in evaluating spinal disease, evaluation of spinal disease may be limited. In these cases, it is very helpful to diagnose spinal disease with MR images synthesized with CT images. (2) Objective: To create synthetic lumbar magnetic resonance (MR) images from computed tomography (CT) scans using generative adversarial network (GAN) models and assess how closely the synthetic images resembled the true images using visual Turing tests (VTTs). (3) Material and Methods: Overall, 285 patients aged ≥ 40 years who underwent lumbar CT and MRI were enrolled. Based on axial CT and T2-weighted axial MR images from 285 patients, an image synthesis model using a GAN was trained using three algorithms (unsupervised, semi-supervised, and supervised methods). Furthermore, VTT to determine how similar the synthetic lumbar MR images generated from lumbar CT axial images were to the true lumbar MR axial images were conducted with 59 patients who were not included in the model training. For the VTT, we designed an evaluation form comprising 600 randomly distributed axial images (150 true and 450 synthetic images from unsupervised, semi-supervised, and supervised methods). Four readers judged the authenticity of each image and chose their first- and second-choice candidates for the true image. In addition, for the three models, structural similarities (SSIM) were evaluated and the peak signal to noise ratio (PSNR) was compared among the three methods. (4) Results: The mean accuracy for the selection of true images for all four readers for their first choice was 52.0% (312/600). The accuracies of determining the true image for each reader’s first and first + second choices, respectively, were as follows: reader 1, 51.3% and 78.0%; reader 2, 38.7% and 62.0%, reader 3, 69.3% and 84.0%, and reader 4, 48.7% and 70.7%. In the case of synthetic images chosen as first and second choices, supervised algorithm-derived images were the most often selected (supervised, 118/600 first and 164/600 second; semi-supervised, 90/600 and 144/600; and unsupervised, 80/600 and 114/600). For image quality, the supervised algorithm received the best score (PSNR: 15.987 ± 1.039, SSIM: 0.518 ± 0.042). (5) Conclusion: This was the pilot study to apply GAN to synthesize lumbar spine MR images from CT images and compare training algorithms of the GAN. Based on VTT, the axial MR images synthesized from lumbar CT using GAN were fairly realistic and the supervised training algorithm was found to provide the closest image to true images.