首页> 外文期刊>Liver international : >Quantitative versus morphological assessment of liver fibrosis: semi-quantitative scores are more robust than digital image fibrosis area estimation.
【24h】

Quantitative versus morphological assessment of liver fibrosis: semi-quantitative scores are more robust than digital image fibrosis area estimation.

机译:肝纤维化的定量与形态评估:半定量评分比数字图像纤维化面积估计更可靠。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND/AIM: Digital image analysis (DIA) allows quantitative assessment of fibrosis on liver biopsy. Accurate determination of a threshold greyscale level representing fibrous tissue is critical. This method has not been fully evaluated in clinical practice. METHODS: Digital images of stained liver biopsy sections were captured by microscopy and converted to greyscale. A novel method of determining the threshold greyscale value at which to measure fibrosis area was developed (peak proportion area change (PPAC)). Reproducibility was tested in comparison with standard interactive thresholding and with semi-quantitative scoring using the Histological activity index (HAI) system by a histopathologist. Fibrosis areas for different sections from the same biopsy core were also compared by each method. RESULTS: Comparison between PPAC and interactive thresholding method demonstrated superior reproducibility of the PPAC method: r > 0.7, P < 0.001 compared with r = 0.19-0.64 (not all reaching significance). On a single section, reproducibility was similar for PPAC and the modified HAI system. When different sections from the same core were compared, the HAI system was more robust. CONCLUSIONS: The PPAC method is superior to standard interactive thresholding. However, variability in DIA scores between sections invalidates the technique for clinical use and semi-quantitative scoring systems remain the gold standard for fibrosis assessment.
机译:背景/目的:数字图像分析(DIA)可以对肝活检中的纤维化进行定量评估。准确确定代表纤维组织的阈值灰度水平至关重要。该方法尚未在临床实践中得到充分评估。方法:通过显微镜捕获染色的肝活检切片的数字图像,并将其转换为灰度。开发了一种确定测量纤维化面积的阈值灰度值的新方法(峰值比例面积变化(PPAC))。通过组织病理学家使用组织学活动指数(HAI)系统,与标准交互阈值和半定量评分相比较,对可重复性进行了测试。每种方法还比较了来自同一活检核心的不同切片的纤维化区域。结果:PPAC和交互式阈值方法之间的比较证明了PPAC方法具有较高的重现性:r> 0.7,P <0.001,而r = 0.19-0.64(并非全部达到显着性)。在单个部分上,PPAC和改进的HAI系统的重现性相似。当比较来自同一核心的不同部分时,HAI系统更加强大。结论:PPAC方法优于标准交互式阈值。但是,各部分之间DIA评分的差异使该技术在临床上无效,半定量评分系统仍然是纤维化评估的金标准。

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