MED-PHAIOct 9, 2025

MRI-derived quantification of hepatic vessel-to-volume ratios in chronic liver disease using a deep learning approach

arXiv:2510.08039v11 citationsh-index: 66Eur Radiol Exp
AI Analysis

This work addresses the problem of non-invasive liver disease assessment for clinicians, but it is incremental as it applies an existing deep learning method to a new medical imaging dataset.

The study used a deep learning model to quantify hepatic vessel volumes from MRI scans in chronic liver disease patients and healthy controls, finding significant differences between groups and correlations with disease severity markers, such as HVVR showing indirect correlations with FIB-4, ALBI, MELD-Na, LSM, and spleen volume (ρ ranging from -0.27 to -0.40).

Background: We aimed to quantify hepatic vessel volumes across chronic liver disease stages and healthy controls using deep learning-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analysis, and assess correlations with biomarkers for liver (dys)function and fibrosis/portal hypertension. Methods: We assessed retrospectively healthy controls, non-advanced and advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) patients using a 3D U-Net model for hepatic vessel segmentation on portal venous phase gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3-T MRI. Total (TVVR), hepatic (HVVR), and intrahepatic portal vein-to-volume ratios (PVVR) were compared between groups and correlated with: albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) and model for end-stage liver disease-sodium (MELD-Na) score, and fibrosis/portal hypertension (Fibrosis-4 [FIB-4] score, liver stiffness measurement [LSM], hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG], platelet count [PLT], and spleen volume). Results: We included 197 subjects, aged 54.9 $\pm$ 13.8 years (mean $\pm$ standard deviation), 111 males (56.3\%): 35 healthy controls, 44 non-ACLD, and 118 ACLD patients. TVVR and HVVR were highest in controls (3.9; 2.1), intermediate in non-ACLD (2.8; 1.7), and lowest in ACLD patients (2.3; 1.0) ($p \leq 0.001$). PVVR was reduced in both non-ACLD and ACLD patients (both 1.2) compared to controls (1.7) ($p \leq 0.001$), but showed no difference between CLD groups ($p = 0.999$). HVVR significantly correlated indirectly with FIB-4, ALBI, MELD-Na, LSM, and spleen volume ($ρ$ ranging from -0.27 to -0.40), and directly with PLT ($ρ= 0.36$). TVVR and PVVR showed similar but weaker correlations. Conclusions: Deep learning-based hepatic vessel volumetry demonstrated differences between healthy liver and chronic liver disease stages and shows correlations with established markers of disease severity.

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes