首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics >Comparison of liver volumetry on contrast‐enhanced CT images: one semiautomatic and two automatic approaches
【2h】

Comparison of liver volumetry on contrast‐enhanced CT images: one semiautomatic and two automatic approaches

机译:在对比增强的CT图像上比较肝脏容量检查:一种半自动和两种自动方法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This study was to evaluate the accuracy, consistency, and efficiency of three liver volumetry methods— one interactive method, an in‐house‐developed 3D medical Image Analysis (3DMIA) system, one automatic active shape model (ASM)‐based segmentation, and one automatic probabilistic atlas (PA)‐guided segmentation method on clinical contrast‐enhanced CT images. Forty‐two datasets, including 27 normal liver and 15 space‐occupying liver lesion patients, were retrospectively included in this study. The three methods — one semiautomatic 3DMIA, one automatic ASM‐based, and one automatic PA‐based liver volumetry — achieved an accuracy with VD (volume difference) of −1.69%, −2.75%, and 3.06% in the normal group, respectively, and with VD of −3.20%, −3.35%, and 4.14% in the space‐occupying lesion group, respectively. However, the three methods achieved an efficiency of 27.63 mins, 1.26 mins, 1.18 mins on average, respectively, compared with the manual volumetry, which took 43.98 mins. The high intraclass correlation coefficient between the three methods and the manual method indicated an excellent agreement on liver volumetry. Significant differences in segmentation time were observed between the three methods (3DMIA, ASM, and PA) and the manual volumetry (p  0.001), as well as between the automatic volumetries (ASM and PA) and the semiautomatic volumetry (3DMIA) (p  0.001). The semiautomatic interactive 3DMIA, automatic ASM‐based, and automatic PA‐based liver volumetry agreed well with manual gold standard in both the normal liver group and the space‐occupying lesion group. The ASM‐ and PA‐based automatic segmentation have better efficiency in clinical use.PACS number(s): 87.55.‐x
机译:这项研究旨在评估三种肝脏容积法的准确性,一致性和效率:一种交互式方法,一种内部开发的3D医学图像分析(3DMIA)系统,一种基于自动活动形状模型(ASM)的分割方法,以及一种在临床对比增强CT图像上自动概率图谱(PA)引导的分割方法。该研究回顾性地包括了42个数据集,包括27例正常肝脏和15例占位性肝病变患者。三种方法-一种半自动3DMIA,一种基于ASM的自动,一种基于PA的自动的肝脏容量测定法-正常组的VD(体积差异)的准确度分别为-1.69%,-2.75%和3.06% ,并且在占位病变组中的VD分别为-3.20%,-3.35%和4.14%。但是,与手动体积采样法(43.98分钟)相比,这三种方法的平均效率分别为27.63分钟,1.26分钟,1.18分钟。三种方法和手动方法之间的类内相关系数较高,表明在肝脏容量测定方面有很好的一致性。三种方法(3DMIA,ASM和PA)与手动容积法(p <0.001)之间以及自动容积法(ASM和PA)与半自动容积计(3DMIA)(p <0.001)。半自动互动式3DMIA,基于ASM的自动和基于PA的自动肝脏容量测定法在正常肝脏组和占位性病变组中均符合手动金标准。基于ASM和PA的自动分割在临床使用中具有更高的效率.PACS编号:87.55。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号