...
首页> 外文期刊>PLoS One >Application of the 3D slicer chest imaging platform segmentation algorithm for large lung nodule delineation
【24h】

Application of the 3D slicer chest imaging platform segmentation algorithm for large lung nodule delineation

机译:3D切片机胸部成像平台分割算法在大肺结节描绘中的应用

获取原文

摘要

Purpose Accurate segmentation of lung nodules is crucial in the development of imaging biomarkers for predicting malignancy of the nodules. Manual segmentation is time consuming and affected by inter-observer variability. We evaluated the robustness and accuracy of a publically available semiautomatic segmentation algorithm that is implemented in the 3D Slicer Chest Imaging Platform (CIP) and compared it with the performance of manual segmentation. Methods CT images of 354 manually segmented nodules were downloaded from the LIDC database. Four radiologists performed the manual segmentation and assessed various nodule characteristics. The semiautomatic CIP segmentation was initialized using the centroid of the manual segmentations, thereby generating four contours for each nodule. The robustness of both segmentation methods was assessed using the region of uncertainty (δ) and Dice similarity index (DSI). The robustness of the segmentation methods was compared using the Wilcoxon-signed rank test (pWilcoxon0.05). The Dice similarity index (DSIAgree) between the manual and CIP segmentations was computed to estimate the accuracy of the semiautomatic contours. Results The median computational time of the CIP segmentation was 10 s. The median CIP and manually segmented volumes were 477 ml and 309 ml, respectively. CIP segmentations were significantly more robust than manual segmentations (median δCIP = 14ml, median dsiCIP = 99% vs. median δmanual = 222ml, median dsimanual = 82%) with pWilcoxon~10−16. The agreement between CIP and manual segmentations had a median DSIAgree of 60%. While 13% (47/354) of the nodules did not require any manual adjustment, minor to substantial manual adjustments were needed for 87% (305/354) of the nodules. CIP segmentations were observed to perform poorly (median DSIAgree≈50%) for non-/sub-solid nodules with subtle appearances and poorly defined boundaries. Conclusion Semi-automatic CIP segmentation can potentially reduce the physician workload for 13% of nodules owing to its computational efficiency and superior stability compared to manual segmentation. Although manual adjustment is needed for many cases, CIP segmentation provides a preliminary contour for physicians as a starting point.
机译:目的肺结节的准确分割对于预测结节恶性程度的成像生物标志物的发展至关重要。手动分段非常耗时,并且受观察者间差异的影响。我们评估了在3D切片机胸部成像平台(CIP)中实现的公开可用的半自动分割算法的鲁棒性和准确性,并将其与手动分割的性能进行了比较。方法从LIDC数据库下载354个手动分割的结节的CT图像。四名放射科医生进行了手动分割,并评估了各种结节特征。使用手动分割的质心初始化半自动CIP分割,从而为每个结节生成四个轮廓。使用不确定性区域(δ)和骰子相似性指数(DSI)评估了两种分割方法的鲁棒性。使用Wilcoxon-符号秩检验(pWilcoxon <0.05)比较了分割方法的鲁棒性。计算手动分割和CIP分割之间的Dice相似性指数(DSIAgree),以估计半自动轮廓的准确性。结果CIP分割的中值计算时间为10 s。 CIP和手动分割的体积的中位数分别为477 ml和309 ml。使用pWilcoxon〜10-16时,CIP分割明显比手动分割更健壮(中位δCIP= 14ml,中位dsiCIP = 99%,中位δmanual= 222ml,中位dsimanual = 82%)。 CIP和手动细分之间的协议的DSIAgree中位数为60%。虽然13%(47/354)的结核不需要任何手动调整,但87%(305/354)的结核需要进行少量或大量的手动调整。观察到CIP分割在外观不佳,边界不明确的非/亚实心结节中表现不佳(中位DSIAgree≈50%)。结论由于半自动CIP分割的计算效率和稳定性优于手动分割,因此可以潜在地减少13%结节的医生工作量。尽管在许多情况下需要手动调整,但是CIP分割为医师提供了初步的轮廓。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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