Comparison of linear and nonlinear implementation of the compartmental tissue uptake model for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.
Comparison of linear and nonlinear implementation of the compartmental tissue uptake model for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/mrm.26324
复制
发表时间：
2017-06
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Chappell MA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kallehauge JF;Sourbron S;Irving B;Tanderup K;Schnabel JA;Chappell MA
使用线性方法拟合示踪剂动力学模型比使用非线性方法快得多，尽管这通常以降低准确性和精度为代价。本研究的目的是推导和比较线性房室组织摄取（CTU）模型与其非线性版本的性能，其百分比误差和精度。线性和非线性CTU模型进行了初步比较，使用不同的噪声和时间采样的模拟。随后，在14例局部晚期宫颈癌患者中证实了线性模型的临床适用性，这些患者接受了动态对比增强磁共振成像检查。当噪声在临床可实现的范围内（对比噪声比>10）时，模拟显示了相等的百分比误差和精度。线性方法明显快于非线性方法，在所有测试的采样率下，最小加速比约为230。临床分析表明，使用线性和非线性CTU模型估计的参数高度相关（ρ ≥ 0.95）。线性CTU模型在计算上更有效并且对时间下采样更稳定，而非线性方法对噪声的变化更鲁棒。这两种方法可以在时间采样和噪声的临床可实现范围内互换使用。Magn Reson Med 77：2414-2423，2017。© 2016 The Authors Magnetic Resonance in Medicine出版由Wiley Periodicals，Inc.国际医学磁共振学会（International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine）这是一个开放获取的条款下的知识共享署名许可证，允许使用，分发和复制在任何媒体上，只要原始作品是适当的引用。
Fitting tracer kinetic models using linear methods is much faster than using their nonlinear counterparts, although this comes often at the expense of reduced accuracy and precision. The aim of this study was to derive and compare the performance of the linear compartmental tissue uptake (CTU) model with its nonlinear version with respect to their percentage error and precision. The linear and nonlinear CTU models were initially compared using simulations with varying noise and temporal sampling. Subsequently, the clinical applicability of the linear model was demonstrated on 14 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer examined with dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Simulations revealed equal percentage error and precision when noise was within clinical achievable ranges (contrast‐to‐noise ratio >10). The linear method was significantly faster than the nonlinear method, with a minimum speedup of around 230 across all tested sampling rates. Clinical analysis revealed that parameters estimated using the linear and nonlinear CTU model were highly correlated (ρ ≥ 0.95). The linear CTU model is computationally more efficient and more stable against temporal downsampling, whereas the nonlinear method is more robust to variations in noise. The two methods may be used interchangeably within clinical achievable ranges of temporal sampling and noise. Magn Reson Med 77:2414–2423, 2017. © 2016 The Authors Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.