Skip to main content

Deep Learning Virtual Contrast-Enhanced T1 Mapping for Contrast-Free Myocardial Extracellular Volume Assessment.

Journal of the American Heart Association

Authors: Sebastian Nowak, Leon M Bischoff, Lenhard Pennig, Kenan Kaya, Alexander Isaak, Maike Theis, Wolfgang Block, Claus C Pieper, Daniel Kuetting, Sebastian Zimmer, Georg Nickenig, Ulrike I Attenberger, Alois M Sprinkart, Julian A Luetkens

BACKGROUND: The acquisition of contrast-enhanced T1 maps to calculate extracellular volume (ECV) requires contrast agent administration and is time consuming. This study investigates generative adversarial networks for contrast-free, virtual extracellular volume (vECV) by generating virtual contrast-enhanced T1 maps.

METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective study includes 2518 registered native and contrast-enhanced T1 maps from 1000 patients who underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance at 1.5 Tesla. Recent hematocrit values of 123 patients (hold-out test) and 96 patients from a different institution (external evaluation) allowed for calculation of conventional ECV. A generative adversarial network was trained to generate virtual contrast-enhanced T1 maps from native T1 maps for vECV creation. Mean and SD of the difference per patient (ΔECV) were calculated and compared by permutation of the 2-sided test with 10 000 resamples. For ECV and vECV, differences in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for discriminating hold-out test patients with normal cardiovascular magnetic resonance versus myocarditis or amyloidosis were tested with Delong's test. ECV and vECV showed a high agreement in patients with myocarditis (ΔECV: hold-out test, 2.0%±1.5%; external evaluation, 1.9%±1.7%) and normal cardiovascular magnetic resonance (ΔECV: hold-out test, 1.9%±1.4%; external evaluation, 1.5%±1.2%), but variations in amyloidosis were higher (ΔECV: hold-out test, 6.2%±6.0%; external evaluation, 15.5%±6.4%). In the hold-out test, ECV and vECV had a comparable AUC for the diagnosis of myocarditis (ECV AUC, 0.77 versus vECV AUC, 0.76; =0.76) and amyloidosis (ECV AUC, 0.99 versus vECV AUC, 0.96; =0.52).

CONCLUSIONS: Generation of vECV on the basis of native T1 maps is feasible. Multicenter training data are required to further enhance generalizability of vECV in amyloidosis.

PMID: 39344639

Participating cluster members