Gotra Akshat, Chartrand Gabriel, Massicotte-Tisluck Karine, Morin-Roy Florence, Vandenbroucke-Menu Franck, de Guise Jacques A, Tang An
Department of Radiology, Saint-Luc Hospital, University of Montreal, 1058 rue Saint-Denis, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H2X 3J4; Department of Radiology, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Imaging and Orthopaedics Research Laboratory (LIO), École de technologie supérieure, Centre de recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Acad Radiol. 2015 Sep;22(9):1088-98. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2015.03.010. Epub 2015 Apr 20.
To compare the repeatability and agreement of a semiautomated liver segmentation method with manual segmentation for assessment of total liver volume on CT (computed tomography).
This retrospective, institutional review board-approved study was conducted in 41 subjects who underwent liver CT for preoperative planning. The major pathologies encountered were colorectal cancer metastases, benign liver lesions and hepatocellular carcinoma. This semiautomated segmentation method is based on variational interpolation and 3D minimal path-surface segmentation. Total and subsegmental liver volumes were segmented from contrast-enhanced CT images in venous phase. Two image analysts independently performed semiautomated segmentations and two other image analysts performed manual segmentations. Repeatability and agreement of both methods were evaluated with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis. Interaction time was recorded for both methods.
Bland-Altman analysis revealed an intrareader agreement of -1 ± 27 mL (mean ± 1.96 standard deviation) with ICC of 0.999 (P < .001) for manual segmentation and 12 ± 97 mL with ICC of 0.991 (P < .001) for semiautomated segmentation. Bland-Altman analysis revealed an interreader agreement of -4 ± 22 mL with ICC of 0.999 (P < .001) for manual segmentation and 5 ± 98 mL with ICC of 0.991 (P < .001) for semiautomated segmentation. Intermethod agreement was found to be 3 ± 120 mL with ICC of 0.988 (P < .001). Mean interaction time was 34.3 ± 16.7 minutes for the manual method and 8.0 ± 1.2 minutes for the semiautomated method (P < .001).
A semiautomated segmentation method can substantially shorten interaction time while preserving a high repeatability and agreement with manual segmentation.
比较一种半自动肝脏分割方法与手动分割在CT(计算机断层扫描)上评估全肝体积的重复性和一致性。
这项经机构审查委员会批准的回顾性研究纳入了41例因术前规划而接受肝脏CT检查的患者。主要病变包括结直肠癌转移、肝脏良性病变和肝细胞癌。这种半自动分割方法基于变分插值和三维最小路径曲面分割。在静脉期从增强CT图像中分割出全肝体积和肝段亚段体积。两名图像分析人员独立进行半自动分割,另外两名图像分析人员进行手动分割。使用组内相关系数(ICC)和Bland-Altman分析评估两种方法的重复性和一致性。记录两种方法的交互时间。
Bland-Altman分析显示,手动分割的阅片者内一致性为-1±27 mL(均值±1.96标准差),ICC为0.999(P<.001);半自动分割的阅片者内一致性为12±97 mL,ICC为0.991(P<.001)。Bland-Altman分析显示,手动分割的阅片者间一致性为-4±22 mL,ICC为0.999(P<.001);半自动分割的阅片者间一致性为5±98 mL,ICC为0.991(P<.001)。两种方法之间的一致性为3±120 mL,ICC为0.988(P<.001)。手动方法的平均交互时间为34.3±16.7分钟,半自动方法为8.0±1.2分钟(P<.001)。
一种半自动分割方法在保持与手动分割高重复性和一致性的同时,可大幅缩短交互时间。