Multicenter validation of synthetic FLAIR as a substitute for FLAIR sequence in acute ischemic stroke.

PURPOSE

To evaluate performance of synthetic and real FLAIR for identifying early stroke in a multicenter cohort.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted using DWI and FLAIR extracted from the Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke image registry (2017-2021). The database was partitioned into subsets according to MRI field strength and manufacturer, and randomly divided into training set (70%) used for model fine-tuning, validation set (15%), and test set (15%). In test set, five readers, blinded to FLAIR sequence type, assessed DWI-FLAIR mismatch using real and synthetic FLAIR. Interobserver agreement for DWI-FLAIR rating and concordance between synthetic and real FLAIR were evaluated with kappa statistics. Sensitivity and specificity for identification of ⩽4.5 h AIS were compared in patients with known onset-to-MRI delay using McNemar's test.

RESULTS

1454 complete MRI sets (1172 patients, median (IQR) age: 73 years (62-82); 762 women) acquired on 125 MRI units were analyzed. In test set (207 MRI), interobserver reproducibility for DWI-FLAIR mismatch labeling was substantial for real and synthetic FLAIR (Fleiss κ = 0.79 (95%CI: 0.73-0.84) and 0.77 (95%CI: 0.71-0.82), respectively). After consensus, concordance between real and synthetic FLAIR was excellent (κ = 0.85 (95%CI: 0.78-0.92)). In 141 MRI sets with known onset-to-MRI delay, diagnostic performances for ⩽4.5 h AIS identification did not differ between real and synthetic FLAIR (sensitivity: 60/71 (85%) vs 59/71 (83%),  = .56; specificity: 65/70 (93%) vs 65/70 (93%),  > 0.99).

CONCLUSION

A deep-learning-based FLAIR fine-tuned on multicenter data can provide comparable performances to real FLAIR for early AIS identification. This approach may help reducing MR protocol duration and motion artifacts.