Cargando…

Comparison of automated segmentation techniques for magnetic resonance images of the prostate

BACKGROUND: Contouring of anatomical regions is a crucial step in the medical workflow and is both time-consuming and prone to intra- and inter-observer variability. This study compares different strategies for automatic segmentation of the prostate in T2-weighted MRIs. METHODS: This study included...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Isaksson, Lars Johannes, Pepa, Matteo, Summers, Paul, Zaffaroni, Mattia, Vincini, Maria Giulia, Corrao, Giulia, Mazzola, Giovanni Carlo, Rotondi, Marco, Lo Presti, Giuliana, Raimondi, Sara, Gandini, Sara, Volpe, Stefania, Haron, Zaharudin, Alessi, Sarah, Pricolo, Paola, Mistretta, Francesco Alessandro, Luzzago, Stefano, Cattani, Federica, Musi, Gennaro, Cobelli, Ottavio De, Cremonesi, Marta, Orecchia, Roberto, Marvaso, Giulia, Petralia, Giuseppe, Jereczek-Fossa, Barbara Alicja
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9921124/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36774463
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-023-00974-y
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Contouring of anatomical regions is a crucial step in the medical workflow and is both time-consuming and prone to intra- and inter-observer variability. This study compares different strategies for automatic segmentation of the prostate in T2-weighted MRIs. METHODS: This study included 100 patients diagnosed with prostate adenocarcinoma who had undergone multi-parametric MRI and prostatectomy. From the T2-weighted MR images, ground truth segmentation masks were established by consensus from two expert radiologists. The prostate was then automatically contoured with six different methods: (1) a multi-atlas algorithm, (2) a proprietary algorithm in the Syngo.Via medical imaging software, and four deep learning models: (3) a V-net trained from scratch, (4) a pre-trained 2D U-net, (5) a GAN extension of the 2D U-net, and (6) a segmentation-adapted EfficientDet architecture. The resulting segmentations were compared and scored against the ground truth masks with one 70/30 and one 50/50 train/test data split. We also analyzed the association between segmentation performance and clinical variables. RESULTS: The best performing method was the adapted EfficientDet (model 6), achieving a mean Dice coefficient of 0.914, a mean absolute volume difference of 5.9%, a mean surface distance (MSD) of 1.93 pixels, and a mean 95th percentile Hausdorff distance of 3.77 pixels. The deep learning models were less prone to serious errors (0.854 minimum Dice and 4.02 maximum MSD), and no significant relationship was found between segmentation performance and clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning-based segmentation techniques can consistently achieve Dice coefficients of 0.9 or above with as few as 50 training patients, regardless of architectural archetype. The atlas-based and Syngo.via methods found in commercial clinical software performed significantly worse (0.855[Formula: see text]0.887 Dice).