首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Diagnostics >Quantification of Carotid Intraplaque Hemorrhage: Comparison between Manual Segmentation and Semi-Automatic Segmentation on Magnetization-Prepared Rapid Acquisition with Gradient-Echo Sequences
【2h】

Quantification of Carotid Intraplaque Hemorrhage: Comparison between Manual Segmentation and Semi-Automatic Segmentation on Magnetization-Prepared Rapid Acquisition with Gradient-Echo Sequences

机译:颈动脉斑块内出血的量化:磁分割准备的梯度回波序列快速采集的手动分割和半自动分割之间的比较

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

Purpose: Carotid intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH) increases risk of territorial cerebral ischemic events, but different sequences or criteria have been used to diagnose or quantify carotid IPH. The purpose of this study was to compare manual segmentation and semi-automatic segmentation for quantification of carotid IPH on magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition with gradient-echo (MPRAGE) sequences. Methods: Forty patients with 16–79% carotid stenosis and IPH on MPRAGE sequences were reviewed by two trained radiologists with more than five years of specialized experience in carotid plaque characterization with carotid plaque MRI. Initially, the radiologists manually viewed the IPH based on the MPRAGE sequence. IPH volume was then measured by three different semi-automatic methods, with high signal intensity 150%, 175%, and 200%, respectively, above that of adjacent muscle on the MPRAGE sequence. Agreement on measurements between manual segmentation and semi-automatic segmentation was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: There was near-perfect agreement between manual segmentation and the 150% and 175% criteria for semi-automatic segmentation in quantification of IPH volume. The ICC of each semi-automatic segmentation were as follows: 150% criteria: 0.861, 175% criteria: 0.809, 200% criteria: 0.491. The ICC value of manual vs. 150% criteria and manual vs. 175% criteria were significantly better than the manual vs. 200% criteria ( < 0.001). Conclusions: The ICC of 150% and 175% criteria for semi-automatic segmentation are more reliable for quantification of IPH volume. Semi-automatic classification tools may be beneficial in large-scale multicenter studies by reducing image analysis time and avoiding bias between human reviewers.
机译:目的:颈动脉斑块内出血(IPH)增加了领土性脑缺血事件的风险,但是已使用不同的顺序或标准来诊断或量化颈动脉IPH。这项研究的目的是比较手动分割和半自动分割以量化磁化制备的梯度回波(MPRAGE)序列快速采集颈动脉IPH。方法:由两名训练有素的放射线医师对40例16-79%的颈动脉狭窄和IPH的MPRAGE序列进行了检查,这些放射线医师在颈动脉斑块MRI诊断中具有超过5年的专业经验。最初,放射科医生根据MPRAGE序列手动查看IPH。然后通过三种不同的半自动方法测量IPH体积,其高信号强度分别比MPRAGE序列上的相邻肌肉高150%,175%和200%。使用类内相关系数(ICC)评估手动分割和半自动分割之间的测量一致性。结果:在IPH体积定量中,手动分割与150%和175%的半自动分割标准几乎完全一致。每个半自动细分的ICC如下:150%标准:0.861,175%标准:0.809,200%标准:0.491。手动与150%标准的ICC值以及手动与175%标准的ICC值明显好于手动与200%标准的ICC值(<0.001)。结论:半自动分割的ICC的150%和175%标准对于IPH体积的量化更为可靠。半自动分类工具可通过减少图像分析时间并避免审稿人之间的偏见在大规模多中心研究中受益。

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