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...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya) |
| Repositorio: | Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:recercat.cat:10230/71591 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10230/71591 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00247-025-06347-7 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Bias Biometry Fetal brain MRI Reproducibility Super-resolution reconstruction |
| 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. |
|---|