Lydia Neubauer, Leonie Forstreuter, Fabian Winter, Fiona Mankertz, Mark O. Wielpütz, Donata Grajecki, A. Steveling, Ali A. Aghdassi, Sebastian Zeißig, Matthew Blackledge, Dirk Voit, Jens Frahm, Susanne Schnell, Werner Weitschies, Linus Großmann
BACKGROUND: Current reference standards for measuring gastric emptying and motility are not considered optimal due to the time required, ionizing radiation, invasiveness, and spatial resolution. PURPOSE: To assess gastric motility using novel real-time dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in combination with static measurements for gastric emptying and training of an automated deep-learning-based segmentation pipeline. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 36 healthy volunteers (20 female, mean 24 ± 3 years) and three patients with diagnosed Crohn's disease. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCES: Participants ingested water to assess fasting motility and pineapple juice for the postprandial state. 3 T, 3D spoiled gradient echo (GRE) sequence and real-time spoiled GRE. ASSESSMENT: Gastric emptying was measured by using the gastric volume, while motility was analyzed by tracking changes in the antrum's cross-sectional area and applying Fast Fourier Transformation. Segmentations were performed using a trained semantic segmentation model. STATISTICAL TESTS: Linear Mixed Model with continuous dependent variables and fixed effects. Models included a random intercept for participants. Statistical significance was defined as p = 0.05. RESULTS: = 64.24 ± 11.87 min). Contraction frequencies (fasted: 2.76 ± 0.43 cpm, fed: 2.89 ± 0.43 cpm) and velocities (fasted: 1.67 ± 0.38 mm/s, fed: 1.72 ± 0.37 mm/s) were within physiological ranges, with fasting conditions characterized by stronger occlusion compared to the fed. Measurements taken from three patients proved that the workflow could be used in a clinical context. DATA CONCLUSION: Real-time MRI with AI-based analysis enabled quantitative assessment of gastric emptying and motility, revealing physiological peristaltic parameters and state-dependent differences in occlusion. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 2. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.