Cargando…

Clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy

INTRODUCTION: Contouring organs at risk (OARs) is a time‐intensive task that is a critical part of radiation therapy. Atlas‐based automatic segmentation has shown some success at reducing this time burden on practitioners; however, this method often requires significant manual editing to reach a cli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gibbons, Eddie, Hoffmann, Matthew, Westhuyzen, Justin, Hodgson, Andrew, Chick, Brendan, Last, Andrew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10122925/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36148621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.618
_version_ 1785029587878543360
author Gibbons, Eddie
Hoffmann, Matthew
Westhuyzen, Justin
Hodgson, Andrew
Chick, Brendan
Last, Andrew
author_facet Gibbons, Eddie
Hoffmann, Matthew
Westhuyzen, Justin
Hodgson, Andrew
Chick, Brendan
Last, Andrew
author_sort Gibbons, Eddie
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Contouring organs at risk (OARs) is a time‐intensive task that is a critical part of radiation therapy. Atlas‐based automatic segmentation has shown some success at reducing this time burden on practitioners; however, this method often requires significant manual editing to reach a clinically accurate standard. Deep learning (DL) auto‐segmentation has recently emerged as a promising solution. This study compares the accuracy of DL and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation in relation to clinical ‘gold standard’ reference contours. METHODS: Ninety CT datasets (30 head and neck, 30 thoracic, 30 pelvic) were automatically contoured using both atlas and DL segmentation techniques. Sixteen critical OARs were then quantitatively measured for accuracy using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD). Qualitative analysis was performed to visually classify the accuracy of each structure into one of four explicitly defined categories. Additionally, the time to edit atlas and DL contours to a clinically acceptable level was recorded for a subset of 9 OARs. RESULTS: Of the 16 OARs analysed, DL delivered statistically significant improvements over atlas segmentation in 13 OARs measured with DSC, 12 OARs measured with HD, and 12 OARs measured qualitatively. The mean editing time for the subset of DL contours was 50%, 23% and 61% faster (all P < 0.05) than that of atlas segmentation for the head and neck, thorax, and pelvis respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning segmentation comprehensively outperformed atlas‐based contouring for the majority of evaluated OARs. Improvements were observed in geometric accuracy and visual acceptability, while editing time was reduced leading to increased workflow efficiency.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10122925
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101229252023-04-24 Clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy Gibbons, Eddie Hoffmann, Matthew Westhuyzen, Justin Hodgson, Andrew Chick, Brendan Last, Andrew J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: Contouring organs at risk (OARs) is a time‐intensive task that is a critical part of radiation therapy. Atlas‐based automatic segmentation has shown some success at reducing this time burden on practitioners; however, this method often requires significant manual editing to reach a clinically accurate standard. Deep learning (DL) auto‐segmentation has recently emerged as a promising solution. This study compares the accuracy of DL and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation in relation to clinical ‘gold standard’ reference contours. METHODS: Ninety CT datasets (30 head and neck, 30 thoracic, 30 pelvic) were automatically contoured using both atlas and DL segmentation techniques. Sixteen critical OARs were then quantitatively measured for accuracy using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD). Qualitative analysis was performed to visually classify the accuracy of each structure into one of four explicitly defined categories. Additionally, the time to edit atlas and DL contours to a clinically acceptable level was recorded for a subset of 9 OARs. RESULTS: Of the 16 OARs analysed, DL delivered statistically significant improvements over atlas segmentation in 13 OARs measured with DSC, 12 OARs measured with HD, and 12 OARs measured qualitatively. The mean editing time for the subset of DL contours was 50%, 23% and 61% faster (all P < 0.05) than that of atlas segmentation for the head and neck, thorax, and pelvis respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning segmentation comprehensively outperformed atlas‐based contouring for the majority of evaluated OARs. Improvements were observed in geometric accuracy and visual acceptability, while editing time was reduced leading to increased workflow efficiency. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-09-23 2023-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10122925/ /pubmed/36148621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.618 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Gibbons, Eddie
Hoffmann, Matthew
Westhuyzen, Justin
Hodgson, Andrew
Chick, Brendan
Last, Andrew
Clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy
title Clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy
title_full Clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy
title_fullStr Clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy
title_full_unstemmed Clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy
title_short Clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy
title_sort clinical evaluation of deep learning and atlas‐based auto‐segmentation for critical organs at risk in radiation therapy
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10122925/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36148621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.618
work_keys_str_mv AT gibbonseddie clinicalevaluationofdeeplearningandatlasbasedautosegmentationforcriticalorgansatriskinradiationtherapy
AT hoffmannmatthew clinicalevaluationofdeeplearningandatlasbasedautosegmentationforcriticalorgansatriskinradiationtherapy
AT westhuyzenjustin clinicalevaluationofdeeplearningandatlasbasedautosegmentationforcriticalorgansatriskinradiationtherapy
AT hodgsonandrew clinicalevaluationofdeeplearningandatlasbasedautosegmentationforcriticalorgansatriskinradiationtherapy
AT chickbrendan clinicalevaluationofdeeplearningandatlasbasedautosegmentationforcriticalorgansatriskinradiationtherapy
AT lastandrew clinicalevaluationofdeeplearningandatlasbasedautosegmentationforcriticalorgansatriskinradiationtherapy