# Deep Learning-based Intraoperative MRI Reconstruction

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.12771 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.12771/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 7 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 23 Jan 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6980/) (2014)
- [SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restarts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.03983/) (2016)
- [fastMRI: An Open Dataset and Benchmarks for Accelerated MRI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.08839/) (2018)
- [MoDL: Model Based Deep Learning Architecture for Inverse Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.02862/) (2017)
- [Learning a Variational Network for Reconstruction of Accelerated MRI Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.00447/) (2017)
- [End-to-End Variational Networks for Accelerated MRI Reconstruction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.06688/) (2020)
- [A Densely Interconnected Network for Deep Learning Accelerated MRI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.02073/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [From Pre- to Intra-operative MRI: Predicting Brain Shift in Temporal Lobe Resection for Epilepsy Surgery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.03785/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Purpose: To evaluate the quality of deep learning reconstruction for prospectively accelerated intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) during resective brain tumor surgery. Materials and Methods: Accelerated iMRI was performed during brain surgery using dual surface coils positioned around the area of resection. A deep learning (DL) model was trained on the fastMRI neuro dataset to mimic the data from the iMRI protocol. Evaluation was performed on imaging material from 40 patients imaged between 01.11.2021 - 01.06.2023 that underwent iMRI during tumor resection surgery. A comparative analysis was conducted between the conventional compressed sense (CS) method and the trained DL reconstruction method. Blinded evaluation of multiple image quality metrics was performed by two working neuro-radiologists and a working neurosurgeon on a 1 to 5 Likert scale (1=non diagnostic, 2=poor, 3=acceptable, 4=good, 5=excellent), and the favored reconstruction variant. Results: The DL reconstruction was strongly favored or favored over the CS reconstruction for 33/40, 39/40, and 8/40 of cases for reader 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Two of three readers consistently assigned higher ratings for the DL reconstructions, and the DL reconstructions had a higher score than their respective CS counterparts for 72%, 72%, and 14% of the cases for reader 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Still, the DL reconstructions exhibited shortcomings such as a striping artifact and reduced signal. Conclusion: DL shows promise to allow for high-quality reconstructions of intraoperative MRI with equal to or improved perceived spatial resolution, signal-to-noise ratio, diagnostic confidence, diagnostic conspicuity, and spatial resolution compared to compressed sense.