Suppr超能文献

急性脑卒中患者非增强 CT 扫描的颅腔提取工具比较。

A Comparison of Cranial Cavity Extraction Tools for Non-contrast Enhanced CT Scans in Acute Stroke Patients.

机构信息

Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Department of Experimental Psychology, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, UK.

出版信息

Neuroinformatics. 2022 Jul;20(3):587-598. doi: 10.1007/s12021-021-09534-7. Epub 2021 Sep 6.

Abstract

Cranial cavity extraction is often the first step in quantitative neuroimaging analyses. However, few automated, validated extraction tools have been developed for non-contrast enhanced CT scans (NECT). The purpose of this study was to compare and contrast freely available tools in an unseen dataset of real-world clinical NECT head scans in order to assess the performance and generalisability of these tools. This study included data from a demographically representative sample of 428 patients who had completed NECT scans following hospitalisation for stroke. In a subset of the scans (n = 20), the intracranial spaces were segmented using automated tools and compared to the gold standard of manual delineation to calculate accuracy, precision, recall, and dice similarity coefficient (DSC) values. Further, three readers independently performed regional visual comparisons of the quality of the results in a larger dataset (n = 428). Three tools were found; one of these had unreliable performance so subsequent evaluation was discontinued. The remaining tools included one that was adapted from the FMRIB software library (fBET) and a convolutional neural network- based tool (rBET). Quantitative comparison showed comparable accuracy, precision, recall and DSC values (fBET: 0.984 ± 0.002; rBET: 0.984 ± 0.003; p = 0.99) between the tools; however, intracranial volume was overestimated. Visual comparisons identified characteristic regional differences in the resulting cranial cavity segmentations. Overall fBET had highest visual quality ratings and was preferred by the readers in the majority of subject results (84%). However, both tools produced high quality extractions of the intracranial space and our findings should improve confidence in these automated CT tools. Pre- and post-processing techniques may further improve these results.

摘要

颅腔提取通常是定量神经影像学分析的第一步。然而,很少有开发用于非对比增强 CT 扫描(NECT)的自动化、经过验证的提取工具。本研究的目的是在一组看不见的真实临床 NECT 头部扫描数据集上比较和对比免费提供的工具,以评估这些工具的性能和泛化能力。本研究包括来自 428 名因中风住院后完成 NECT 扫描的患者的代表性样本数据。在扫描的一个子集(n=20)中,使用自动化工具对颅内空间进行分割,并与手动勾画的金标准进行比较,以计算准确性、精度、召回率和骰子相似系数(DSC)值。此外,三名读者在更大的数据集(n=428)中独立进行了结果质量的区域视觉比较。发现了三种工具;其中一种的性能不可靠,因此后续评估停止。其余的工具包括一种是从 FMRIB 软件库(fBET)改编的,另一种是基于卷积神经网络的工具(rBET)。定量比较显示,工具之间的准确性、精度、召回率和 DSC 值(fBET:0.984±0.002;rBET:0.984±0.003;p=0.99)具有可比性;然而,颅内体积被高估了。视觉比较确定了结果颅腔分割中存在特征性的区域差异。总体而言,fBET 的视觉质量评分最高,并且在大多数主题结果中都受到读者的青睐(84%)。然而,两种工具都能高质量地提取颅内空间,我们的发现应该提高对这些自动 CT 工具的信心。预处理和后处理技术可能会进一步改善这些结果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/54e5/9547790/27e66415154b/12021_2021_9534_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验