A Dual-Channel Deep Learning Approach for Lung Cavity Estimation From Hyperpolarized Gas and Proton MRI

Abstract

Background: Hyperpolarized gas MRI can quantify regional lung ventilation via biomarkers, including the ventilation defect percentage (VDP). VDP is computed from segmentations derived from spatially co-registered functional hyperpolarized gas and structural proton (1H)-MRI. Although acquired at similar lung inflation levels, they are frequently misaligned, requiring a lung cavity estimation (LCE). Recently, single-channel, mono-modal deep learning (DL)-based methods have shown promise for pulmonary image segmentation problems. Multichannel, multimodal approaches may outperform single-channel alternatives. Purpose: We hypothesized that a DL-based dual-channel approach, leveraging both 1H-MRI and Xenon-129-MRI (129Xe-MRI), can generate LCEs more accurately than single-channel alternatives. Study Type: Retrospective. Population: A total of 480 corresponding 1H-MRI and 129Xe-MRI scans from 26 healthy participants (median age [range]: 11 [8–71]; 50% females) and 289 patients with pulmonary pathologies (median age [range]: 47 [6–83]; 51% females) were split into training (422 scans [88%]; 257 participants [82%]) and testing (58 scans [12%]; 58 participants [18%]) sets. Field Strength/Sequence: 1.5-T, three-dimensional (3D) spoiled gradient-recalled 1H-MRI and 3D steady-state free-precession 129Xe-MRI. Assessment: We developed a multimodal DL approach, integrating 129Xe-MRI and 1H-MRI, in a dual-channel convolutional neural network. We compared this approach to single-channel alternatives using manually edited LCEs as a benchmark. We further assessed a fully automatic DL-based framework to calculate VDPs and compared it to manually generated VDPs. Statistical Tests: Friedman tests with post hoc Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons compared single-channel and dual-channel DL approaches using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), average boundary Hausdorff distance (average HD), and relative error (XOR) metrics. Bland–Altman analysis and paired t-tests compared manual and DL-generated VDPs. A P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The dual-channel approach significantly outperformed single-channel approaches, achieving a median (range) DSC, average HD, and XOR of 0.967 (0.867–0.978), 1.68 mm (37.0–0.778), and 0.066 (0.246–0.045), respectively. DL-generated VDPs were statistically indistinguishable from manually generated VDPs (P = 0.710). Data Conclusion: Our dual-channel approach generated LCEs, which could be integrated with ventilated lung segmentations to produce biomarkers such as the VDP without manual intervention. Evidence Level: 4. Technical Efficacy: Stage 1.