Use of Deep Learning to Predict Final Ischemic Stroke Lesions From Initial Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Importance

Predicting infarct size and location is important for decision-making and prognosis in patients with acute stroke.

Objectives

To determine whether a deep learning model can predict final infarct lesions using magnetic resonance images (MRIs) acquired at initial presentation (baseline) and to compare the model with current clinical prediction methods.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this multicenter prognostic study, a specific type of neural network for image segmentation (U-net) was trained, validated, and tested using patients from the Imaging Collaterals in Acute Stroke (iCAS) study from April 14, 2014, to April 15, 2018, and the Diffusion Weighted Imaging Evaluation for Understanding Stroke Evolution Study–2 (DEFUSE-2) study from July 14, 2008, to September 17, 2011 (reported in October 2012). Patients underwent baseline perfusion-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging and MRI at 3 to 7 days after baseline. Patients were grouped into unknown, minimal, partial, and major reperfusion status based on 24-hour imaging results. Baseline images acquired at presentation were inputs, and the final true infarct lesion at 3 to 7 days was considered the ground truth for the model. The model calculated the probability of infarction for every voxel, which can be thresholded to produce a prediction. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2018, to March 7, 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Area under the curve, Dice score coefficient (DSC) (a metric from 0-1 indicating the extent of overlap between the prediction and the ground truth; a DSC of ≥0.5 represents significant overlap), and volume error. Current clinical methods were compared with model performance in subgroups of patients with minimal or major reperfusion.

Results

Among the 182 patients included in the model (97 women [53.3%]; mean [SD] age, 65 [16] years), the deep learning model achieved a median area under the curve of 0.92 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.87-0.96), DSC of 0.53 (IQR, 0.31-0.68), and volume error of 9 (IQR, −14 to 29) mL. In subgroups with minimal (DSC, 0.58 [IQR, 0.31-0.67] vs 0.55 [IQR, 0.40-0.65];P = .37) or major (DSC, 0.48 [IQR, 0.29-0.65] vs 0.45 [IQR, 0.15-0.54];P = .002) reperfusion for which comparison with existing clinical methods was possible, the deep learning model had comparable or better performance.

Conclusions and Relevance

The deep learning model appears to have successfully predicted infarct lesions from baseline imaging without reperfusion information and achieved comparable performance to existing clinical methods. Predicting the subacute infarct lesion may help clinicians prepare for decompression treatment and aid in patient selection for neuroprotective clinical trials.