Accuracy evaluation of an automatic landmarking method based on 3D segmented CT scans of full lower limbs with knee osteoarthritis

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Clément Horteur , Nolwenn Fougeron , Benoît Gaulin , Ysé Roch , Marek Bucki , Estelle Palluel , Yohan Payan , Antoine Perrier
{"title":"Accuracy evaluation of an automatic landmarking method based on 3D segmented CT scans of full lower limbs with knee osteoarthritis","authors":"Clément Horteur ,&nbsp;Nolwenn Fougeron ,&nbsp;Benoît Gaulin ,&nbsp;Ysé Roch ,&nbsp;Marek Bucki ,&nbsp;Estelle Palluel ,&nbsp;Yohan Payan ,&nbsp;Antoine Perrier","doi":"10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.112292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In preoperative planning, a number of techniques for registration of anatomical landmarks on bones, or “bones landmarking”, have been developed for automatic measurement of lower limbs. However, the evaluation of these techniques is often neglected, reducing confidence in results and limiting clinical applications. We propose a protocol to evaluate landmarking techniques applied to thirty 3D images of osteoarthritic lower limbs. The protocol includes the evaluation of the ground truth based on manual landmarking performed by two experienced clinicians. Intra- and inter-operator variability were quantified. Automatic landmarking was evaluated using the same procedure and compared to manual landmarking by computing distances with bounding boxes including manual landmarks. The method was applied to 87 landmarks on the femur, tibia, fibula, and patella. For intra-operator variability, the mean median error was 2.0 mm, with a maximum of 42.1 mm. For inter-operator variability, errors ranged from 0.0 to 43.5 mm, with a mean median error of 2.3 mm across all landmarks. The mean median error between manual and automatic landmarking methods was 2.4 mm, with a range from 0.0 mm to 22.8 mm. Confidence intervals of automatic landmarking errors were consistent with intra- and inter-operator variability confidence intervals. Approximately 42 % of the automatic landmarks were inside their bounding boxes, with a mean distance of 1.4 mm from the box for landmarks on the outside. Results showed different errors depending on landmark location and coordinates. Intra- and inter-operator variability shed light on the difficulty of defining ground truth based on manual segmentation. This finding emphasizes the need for a rigorous evaluation protocol for landmarking validation, including the verification of statistical test hypotheses and population size influence.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12063,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Radiology","volume":"191 ","pages":"Article 112292"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X2500378X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In preoperative planning, a number of techniques for registration of anatomical landmarks on bones, or “bones landmarking”, have been developed for automatic measurement of lower limbs. However, the evaluation of these techniques is often neglected, reducing confidence in results and limiting clinical applications. We propose a protocol to evaluate landmarking techniques applied to thirty 3D images of osteoarthritic lower limbs. The protocol includes the evaluation of the ground truth based on manual landmarking performed by two experienced clinicians. Intra- and inter-operator variability were quantified. Automatic landmarking was evaluated using the same procedure and compared to manual landmarking by computing distances with bounding boxes including manual landmarks. The method was applied to 87 landmarks on the femur, tibia, fibula, and patella. For intra-operator variability, the mean median error was 2.0 mm, with a maximum of 42.1 mm. For inter-operator variability, errors ranged from 0.0 to 43.5 mm, with a mean median error of 2.3 mm across all landmarks. The mean median error between manual and automatic landmarking methods was 2.4 mm, with a range from 0.0 mm to 22.8 mm. Confidence intervals of automatic landmarking errors were consistent with intra- and inter-operator variability confidence intervals. Approximately 42 % of the automatic landmarks were inside their bounding boxes, with a mean distance of 1.4 mm from the box for landmarks on the outside. Results showed different errors depending on landmark location and coordinates. Intra- and inter-operator variability shed light on the difficulty of defining ground truth based on manual segmentation. This finding emphasizes the need for a rigorous evaluation protocol for landmarking validation, including the verification of statistical test hypotheses and population size influence.
基于全下肢膝骨关节炎的三维分割CT自动标记方法的准确性评估
在术前规划中,已经开发了许多用于自动测量下肢的骨骼解剖标记或“骨骼标记”的注册技术。然而,这些技术的评估往往被忽视,降低了对结果的信心,限制了临床应用。我们提出了一种方案来评估应用于30个骨关节炎下肢3D图像的地标技术。该方案包括基于两名经验丰富的临床医生进行的手动地标的地面真相评估。量化了操作员内部和操作员之间的可变性。使用相同的程序评估自动地标,并通过计算包含手动地标的边界框的距离与手动地标进行比较。该方法应用于股骨、胫骨、腓骨和髌骨上的87个标记。对于操作者内部变异,平均中位误差为2.0 mm,最大值为42.1 mm。对于操作者之间的差异,误差范围从0.0到43.5 mm,所有地标的平均中位误差为2.3 mm。手动和自动标记方法的平均中位误差为2.4 mm,误差范围为0.0 mm至22.8 mm。自动地标误差的置信区间与操作者内部和操作者之间的变异置信区间一致。大约42%的自动地标位于其边界框内,外部地标与边界框的平均距离为1.4 mm。结果表明,不同的地标位置和坐标会产生不同的误差。操作符内部和操作符之间的可变性揭示了基于人工分割定义地面真值的困难。这一发现强调需要一个严格的评估方案来验证里程碑,包括验证统计检验假设和人口规模的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
398
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: European Journal of Radiology is an international journal which aims to communicate to its readers, state-of-the-art information on imaging developments in the form of high quality original research articles and timely reviews on current developments in the field. Its audience includes clinicians at all levels of training including radiology trainees, newly qualified imaging specialists and the experienced radiologist. Its aim is to inform efficient, appropriate and evidence-based imaging practice to the benefit of patients worldwide.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信