TY - JOUR T1 - Synthetic MRI for Clinical Neuroimaging: Results of the Magnetic Resonance Image Compilation (MAGiC) Prospective, Multicenter, Multireader Trial JF - American Journal of Neuroradiology JO - Am. J. Neuroradiol. SP - 1103 LP - 1110 DO - 10.3174/ajnr.A5227 VL - 38 IS - 6 AU - L.N. Tanenbaum AU - A.J. Tsiouris AU - A.N. Johnson AU - T.P. Naidich AU - M.C. DeLano AU - E.R. Melhem AU - P. Quarterman AU - S.X. Parameswaran AU - A. Shankaranarayanan AU - M. Goyen AU - A.S. Field Y1 - 2017/06/01 UR - http://www.ajnr.org/content/38/6/1103.abstract N2 - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Synthetic MR imaging enables reconstruction of various image contrasts from 1 scan, reducing scan times and potentially providing novel information. This study is the first large, prospective comparison of synthetic-versus-conventional MR imaging for routine neuroimaging.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective multireader, multicase noninferiority trial of 1526 images read by 7 blinded neuroradiologists was performed with prospectively acquired synthetic and conventional brain MR imaging case-control pairs from 109 subjects (mean, 53.0 ± 18.5 years of age; range, 19–89 years of age) with neuroimaging indications. Each case included conventional T1- and T2-weighted, T1 and T2 FLAIR, and STIR and/or proton density and synthetic reconstructions from multiple-dynamic multiple-echo imaging. Images were randomized and independently assessed for diagnostic quality, morphologic legibility, radiologic findings indicative of diagnosis, and artifacts.RESULTS: Clinical MR imaging studies revealed 46 healthy and 63 pathologic cases. Overall diagnostic quality of synthetic MR images was noninferior to conventional imaging on a 5-level Likert scale (P < .001; mean synthetic-conventional, −0.335 ± 0.352; Δ = 0.5; lower limit of the 95% CI, −0.402). Legibility of synthetic and conventional morphology agreed in >95%, except in the posterior limb of the internal capsule for T1, T1 FLAIR, and proton-density views (all, >80%). Synthetic T2 FLAIR had more pronounced artifacts, including +24.1% of cases with flow artifacts and +17.6% cases with white noise artifacts.CONCLUSIONS: Overall synthetic MR imaging quality was similar to that of conventional proton-density, STIR, and T1- and T2-weighted contrast views across neurologic conditions. While artifacts were more common in synthetic T2 FLAIR, these were readily recognizable and did not mimic pathology but could necessitate additional conventional T2 FLAIR to confirm the diagnosis.κKappa statisticMAGiCMAGnetic resonance image CompilationMDMEmultiple-dynamic multiple-echoPDproton density ER -