Shim Hackjoon, Chang Samuel, Tao Cheng, Wang Jin-Hong, Kwoh C Kent, Bae Kyongtae T
Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
Radiology. 2009 May;251(2):548-56. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2512081332.
This HIPAA-compliant study was exempt from institutional review board approval because the 10 image data sets were deidentified in the Osteoarthritis Initiative database, and they were processed and analyzed without any clinical information being accessed. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the efficiency and reproducibility of the semiautomated graph-cut method (SA method) in the segmentation of knee cartilage and to compare its performance with that of the conventional manual delineation segmentation method (M method). Two radiologists independently performed segmentation with each method in two separate sessions: They performed the M method (M1 and M2 for the first and second sessions, respectively) for every third section and the SA method (SA1 and SA2 for the first and second sessions, respectively) for every section. The SA method was significantly more efficient (mean processing time, 53 minutes vs 156 minutes for SA1 vs M1 and 53 minutes vs 118 minutes for SA2 vs M2; P < .001) and reproducible (mean volume overlap, 94.3% vs 87.8% for the SA method vs the M method; P < .001) than the M method.
这项符合《健康保险流通与责任法案》(HIPAA)的研究无需经过机构审查委员会的批准,因为这10个图像数据集在骨关节炎倡议数据库中已去除身份标识,并且在处理和分析过程中未获取任何临床信息。本研究的目的是前瞻性评估半自动图割法(SA法)在膝关节软骨分割中的效率和可重复性,并将其性能与传统的手动描绘分割法(M法)进行比较。两名放射科医生在两个不同的时间段分别使用每种方法进行分割:他们对每三个切片执行M法(第一次和第二次会话分别为M1和M2),对每个切片执行SA法(第一次和第二次会话分别为SA1和SA2)。SA法比M法显著更高效(平均处理时间,SA1与M1相比为53分钟对156分钟,SA2与M2相比为53分钟对118分钟;P <.001)且更具可重复性(平均体积重叠率,SA法与M法相比为94.3%对87.8%;P <.001)。