BACKGROUND: Contouring of anatomical regions is a crucial step in the medical workflow and is both time-consuming and prone to intra- and inter-observer variability. This study compares different strategies for automatic segmentation of the prostate in T2-weighted MRIs. METHODS: This study included 100 patients diagnosed with prostate adenocarcinoma who had undergone multi-parametric MRI and prostatectomy. From the T2-weighted MR images, ground truth segmentation masks were established by consensus from two expert radiologists. The prostate was then automatically contoured with six different methods: (1) a multi-atlas algorithm, (2) a proprietary algorithm in the Syngo.Via medical imaging software, and four deep learning models: (3) a V-net trained from scratch, (4) a pre-trained 2D U-net, (5) a GAN extension of the 2D U-net, and (6) a segmentation-adapted EfficientDet architecture. The resulting segmentations were compared and scored against the ground truth masks with one 70/30 and one 50/50 train/test data split. We also analyzed the association between segmentation performance and clinical variables. RESULTS: The best performing method was the adapted EfficientDet (model 6), achieving a mean Dice coefficient of 0.914, a mean absolute volume difference of 5.9%, a mean surface distance (MSD) of 1.93 pixels, and a mean 95th percentile Hausdorff distance of 3.77 pixels. The deep learning models were less prone to serious errors (0.854 minimum Dice and 4.02 maximum MSD), and no significant relationship was found between segmentation performance and clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning-based segmentation techniques can consistently achieve Dice coefficients of 0.9 or above with as few as 50 training patients, regardless of architectural archetype. The atlas-based and Syngo.via methods found in commercial clinical software performed significantly worse (0.855[Formula: see text]0.887 Dice).
Comparison of automated segmentation techniques for magnetic resonance images of the prostate.
阅读:6
作者:Isaksson Lars Johannes, Pepa Matteo, Summers Paul, Zaffaroni Mattia, Vincini Maria Giulia, Corrao Giulia, Mazzola Giovanni Carlo, Rotondi Marco, Lo Presti Giuliana, Raimondi Sara, Gandini Sara, Volpe Stefania, Haron Zaharudin, Alessi Sarah, Pricolo Paola, Mistretta Francesco Alessandro, Luzzago Stefano, Cattani Federica, Musi Gennaro, Cobelli Ottavio De, Cremonesi Marta, Orecchia Roberto, Marvaso Giulia, Petralia Giuseppe, Jereczek-Fossa Barbara Alicja
| 期刊: | BMC Medical Imaging | 影响因子: | 3.200 |
| 时间: | 2023 | 起止号: | 2023 Feb 11; 23(1):32 |
| doi: | 10.1186/s12880-023-00974-y | ||
特别声明
1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。
2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。
3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。
4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。
