Biometry and volumetry in multi-centric fetal brain magnetic resonance imaging: assessing the bias of super-resolution reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Fetal brain MRI is increasingly used to complement ultrasound imaging. Images are processed using complex super-resolution reconstruction pipelines, which may bias biometric and volumetric measurements. OBJECTIVE: To assess the consistency of 2-dimensional (D) biometric and 3-D volumetri...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Sanchez T, Mihailov A, Koob M, Girard N, Manchon A, Valenzuela I, Gómez-Chiari M, Martí Juan G, Pron A, Eixarch E, Piella G, Gonzalez Ballester MA, Camara O, Dunet V, Auzias G, Bach Cuadra M
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2025
País:España
Institución:Fundació Sant Joan de Déu
Repositorio:r-FSJD. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica de la Fundació Sant Joan de Déu
OAI Identifier:oai:fsjd.fundanetsuite.com:p29011
Acceso en línea:https://fsjd.fundanetsuite.com/Publicaciones/ProdCientif/PublicacionFrw.aspx?id=29011
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Bias
Biometry
Fetal brain MRI
Reproducibility
Super-resolution reconstruction
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Fetal brain MRI is increasingly used to complement ultrasound imaging. Images are processed using complex super-resolution reconstruction pipelines, which may bias biometric and volumetric measurements. OBJECTIVE: To assess the consistency of 2-dimensional (D) biometric and 3-D volumetric measurements across three hospitals using three widely used super-resolution reconstruction pipelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective multi-centric study used T2-weighted fetal brain MRI scans acquired at three hospitals between 2009 and 2023. MRIs from each subject were reconstructed with each super-resolution reconstruction method, and biometric measurements were performed by four experts. Automated 3-D volumetry was performed using a state-of-the-art segmentation method. A qualitative evaluation assessed the clinicians' likelihood of using super-resolution reconstructed volumes in their practice. RESULTS: Eighty-four healthy subjects were included. Biometric measurements revealed statistically significant changes that consistently remained below voxel width (0.8 mm; P<0.001). Automated 3-D volumetry revealed small systematic effects (<2.8%; P<0.001). The qualitative evaluation showed systematic differences between super-resolution reconstruction methods for the perception of white matter intensity (P=0.02) and sharpness of the image (P=0.01). CONCLUSION: Variations in 2-D and 3-D quantitative measurements did not show any large systematic bias when using different super-resolution reconstruction methods for clinical radiological assessment across centers, scanners, and raters.