Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
197,768 studies31 sourcesUpdated 5 min ago
PreprintCC BYmedRxiv

Automated Brain Segmentation in Accelerated T2-Weighted MRI: Effects of Deep Learning-Based Reconstruction

  1. 1AGH University of Krakow, 30-059 Krakow, Poland

Abstract

BackgroundAutomated brain volumetry is increasingly used for clinical and research assessment, but its outputs depend on acquisition and reconstruction settings. We evaluated how parallel-imaging acceleration and vendor deep-learning reconstruction (Siemens Deep Resolve) affect automated volumetry on T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MRI, and whether deep-learning reconstruction stabilises measurements across protocols.

MethodsFour healthy volunteers each underwent 14 T2-TSE-TRA acquisitions on a 1.5 T scanner, covering seven protocols (baseline, GRAPPA R = 2, 3, 4, and SMS x2, x3, x4), with each protocol acquired separately once with Deep Resolve off and once with Deep Resolve on, for 56 acquisitions in total. Six pipelines were applied: SynthSeg, OpenMAP-T2, and GOUHFI 2.0 for subcortical parcellation, and TotalSegmentator MRI, HD-BET, and NV-Segment-CTMR for whole-brain masking. A three-rater STAPLE consensus of six subcortical structures on the baseline acquisition served as the expert reference. Reference-relative accuracy (absolute percentage error), cross-protocol dispersion (coefficient of variation), and spatial reproducibility (Dice coefficient and 95th-percentile surface distance) were compared between reconstruction states.

ResultsDeep Resolve improved reference-relative accuracy most for GOUHFI 2.0 (pooled median absolute percentage error 28.4% to 21.9%), modestly for SynthSeg (16.2% to 15.5%), and had a mixed, structure-dependent effect for OpenMAP-T2. It approximately halved cross-protocol dispersion for all three parcellation tools (coefficient of variation 2.62% to 1.39% for SynthSeg, 4.42% to 2.14% for OpenMAP-T2, and 21.75% to 7.87% for GOUHFI) and improved spatial reproducibility in parallel. It eliminated the systematic GOUHFI under-segmentation seen at high acceleration under conventional reconstruction (median deviation -31.6% at GRAPPA R = 4; 14 failure events under conventional reconstruction, none with Deep Resolve). Whole-brain masking was robust in both states.

ConclusionsDeep Resolve improved the robustness of automated brain segmentation in accelerated T2-weighted MRI, reducing cross-protocol variability and improving spatial reproducibility, with the largest reduction in reference-relative error in the most acceleration-sensitive pipeline. The elimination of severe segmentation failures observed under conventional reconstruction highlights its potential to support reliable volumetry at higher acceleration. Reconstruction optimization therefore offers a practical route to more consistent quantitative measurements across acquisition protocols.

Related

  1. Evaluation of accelerated whole-body diffusion weighted imaging with deep learning reconstruction in patients with metastatic prostate cancer: assessment of image quality and ADC estimates.
    E. Kousi, M. Rata, D.-M. Koh +7
    medRxivPreprintCC BY-NC-NDFull textMedical imaging & radiologymedRxiv
  2. Learning optimized sampling patterns for accelerated MRI reconstruction via diffusion models
    Sriram Ravula, Brett Levac, Yamin Arefeen +2
    Journal of Medical ImagingPeer-reviewedLicence not statedFull text21 citedMedical imaging & radiologyPMCOpenAlex
  3. A novel morphological assessment approach for abdominal aortic aneurysms: automated segmentation and measurement using a semi-supervised deep learning algorithm
    Guangkuo Wang, Jingyi Zeng, Min Li +3
    Frontiers in cardiovascular medicinePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textCardiovascular medicineEurope PMCCrossref
  4. Automated morphometric segmentation analysis of hand X-ray image using deep learning network
    Yiyang Zhang, Zhukai Zhuang, Pengli Yu +3
    BMC Medical ImagingPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textMedical imaging & radiologyDOAJ
  5. Fully Automated Segmentation of [18F]FDG and [68Ga]/[18F]PSMA PET/CT Images via Data-Centric Deep Learning
    Manuel Pires, Sebastian Gutschmayer, Enrica Bergalla +42
    Journal of Nuclear MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textMedical imaging & radiologyPMC
BibTeX
@misc{lasek2026automated,
  title = {{Automated Brain Segmentation in Accelerated T2-Weighted MRI: Effects of Deep Learning-Based Reconstruction}},
  author = {J. LASEK and R. Obuchowicz and M. Strzelecki and I. Dwojak and W. Kanas and I. Obuchowicz and A. Krzyzak and J. Minkowski},
  howpublished = {medRxiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = sep,
  doi = {10.64898/2026.09.08.26362537},
  url = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.08.26362537v1},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Automated Brain Segmentation in Accelerated T2-Weighted MRI: Effects of Deep Learning-Based Reconstruction
AU  - J. LASEK
AU  - R. Obuchowicz
AU  - M. Strzelecki
AU  - I. Dwojak
AU  - W. Kanas
AU  - I. Obuchowicz
AU  - A. Krzyzak
AU  - J. Minkowski
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/08
PB  - medRxiv
DO  - 10.64898/2026.09.08.26362537
UR  - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.08.26362537v1
AB  - BackgroundAutomated brain volumetry is increasingly used for clinical and research assessment, but its outputs depend on acquisition and reconstruction settings. We evaluated how parallel-imaging acceleration and vendor deep-learning reconstruction (Siemens Deep Resolve) affect automated volumetry on T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MRI, and whether deep-learning reconstruction stabilises measurements across protocols.  MethodsFour healthy volunteers each underwent 14 T2-TSE-TRA acquisitions on a 1.5 T scanner, covering seven protocols (baseline, GRAPPA R = 2, 3, 4, and SMS x2, x3, x4), with each protocol acquired separately once with Deep Resolve off and once with Deep Resolve on, for 56 acquisitions in total. Six pipelines were applied: SynthSeg, OpenMAP-T2, and GOUHFI 2.0 for subcortical parcellation, and TotalSegmentator MRI, HD-BET, and NV-Segment-CTMR for whole-brain masking. A three-rater STAPLE consensus of six subcortical structures on the baseline acquisition served as the expert reference. Reference-relative accuracy (absolute percentage error), cross-protocol dispersion (coefficient of variation), and spatial reproducibility (Dice coefficient and 95th-percentile surface distance) were compared between reconstruction states.  ResultsDeep Resolve improved reference-relative accuracy most for GOUHFI 2.0 (pooled median absolute percentage error 28.4% to 21.9%), modestly for SynthSeg (16.2% to 15.5%), and had a mixed, structure-dependent effect for OpenMAP-T2. It approximately halved cross-protocol dispersion for all three parcellation tools (coefficient of variation 2.62% to 1.39% for SynthSeg, 4.42% to 2.14% for OpenMAP-T2, and 21.75% to 7.87% for GOUHFI) and improved spatial reproducibility in parallel. It eliminated the systematic GOUHFI under-segmentation seen at high acceleration under conventional reconstruction (median deviation -31.6% at GRAPPA R = 4; 14 failure events under conventional reconstruction, none with Deep Resolve). Whole-brain masking was robust in both states.  ConclusionsDeep Resolve improved the robustness of automated brain segmentation in accelerated T2-weighted MRI, reducing cross-protocol variability and improving spatial reproducibility, with the largest reduction in reference-relative error in the most acceleration-sensitive pipeline. The elimination of severe segmentation failures observed under conventional reconstruction highlights its potential to support reliable volumetry at higher acceleration. Reconstruction optimization therefore offers a practical route to more consistent quantitative measurements across acquisition protocols.
ER  -