Assessment of deep learning technique for fully automated mandibular segmentation.

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Ebru Yurdakurban, Yağızalp Süküt, Gökhan Serhat Duran
{"title":"Assessment of deep learning technique for fully automated mandibular segmentation.","authors":"Ebru Yurdakurban, Yağızalp Süküt, Gökhan Serhat Duran","doi":"10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.09.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study aimed to assess the precision of an open-source, clinician-trained, and user-friendly convolutional neural network-based model for automatically segmenting the mandible.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 55 cone-beam computed tomography scans that met the inclusion criteria were collected and divided into test and training groups. The MONAI (Medical Open Network for Artificial Intelligence) Label active learning tool extension was used to train the automatic model. To assess the model's performance, 15 cone-beam computed tomography scans from the test group were inputted into the model. The ground truth was obtained from manual segmentation data. Metrics including the Dice similarity coefficient, Hausdorff 95%, precision, recall, and segmentation times were calculated. In addition, surface deviations and volumetric differences between the automated and manual segmentation results were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The automated model showed a high level of similarity to the manual segmentation results, with a mean Dice similarity coefficient of 0.926 ± 0.014. The Hausdorff distance was 1.358 ± 0.466 mm, whereas the mean recall and precision values were 0.941 ± 0.028 and 0.941 ± 0.022, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the arithmetic mean of the surface deviation for the entire mandible and 11 different anatomic regions. In terms of volumetric comparisons, the difference between the 2 groups was 1.62 mm³, which was not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The automated model was found to be suitable for clinical use, demonstrating a high degree of agreement with the reference manual method. Clinicians can use open-source software to develop custom automated segmentation models tailored to their specific needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50806,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics","volume":"167 2","pages":"242-249"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.09.006","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to assess the precision of an open-source, clinician-trained, and user-friendly convolutional neural network-based model for automatically segmenting the mandible.

Methods: A total of 55 cone-beam computed tomography scans that met the inclusion criteria were collected and divided into test and training groups. The MONAI (Medical Open Network for Artificial Intelligence) Label active learning tool extension was used to train the automatic model. To assess the model's performance, 15 cone-beam computed tomography scans from the test group were inputted into the model. The ground truth was obtained from manual segmentation data. Metrics including the Dice similarity coefficient, Hausdorff 95%, precision, recall, and segmentation times were calculated. In addition, surface deviations and volumetric differences between the automated and manual segmentation results were analyzed.

Results: The automated model showed a high level of similarity to the manual segmentation results, with a mean Dice similarity coefficient of 0.926 ± 0.014. The Hausdorff distance was 1.358 ± 0.466 mm, whereas the mean recall and precision values were 0.941 ± 0.028 and 0.941 ± 0.022, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the arithmetic mean of the surface deviation for the entire mandible and 11 different anatomic regions. In terms of volumetric comparisons, the difference between the 2 groups was 1.62 mm³, which was not statistically significant.

Conclusions: The automated model was found to be suitable for clinical use, demonstrating a high degree of agreement with the reference manual method. Clinicians can use open-source software to develop custom automated segmentation models tailored to their specific needs.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
13.30%
发文量
432
审稿时长
66 days
期刊介绍: Published for more than 100 years, the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics remains the leading orthodontic resource. It is the official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, the American Board of Orthodontics, and the College of Diplomates of the American Board of Orthodontics. Each month its readers have access to original peer-reviewed articles that examine all phases of orthodontic treatment. Illustrated throughout, the publication includes tables, color photographs, and statistical data. Coverage includes successful diagnostic procedures, imaging techniques, bracket and archwire materials, extraction and impaction concerns, orthognathic surgery, TMJ disorders, removable appliances, and adult therapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信