Common carotid segmentation in 18F-sodium fluoride PET/CT scans: Head-to-head comparison of artificial intelligence-based and manual method

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY
Reza Piri, Yaran Hamakan, Ask Vang, Lars Edenbrandt, Måns Larsson, Olof Enqvist, Oke Gerke, Poul Flemming Høilund-Carlsen
{"title":"Common carotid segmentation in 18F-sodium fluoride PET/CT scans: Head-to-head comparison of artificial intelligence-based and manual method","authors":"Reza Piri,&nbsp;Yaran Hamakan,&nbsp;Ask Vang,&nbsp;Lars Edenbrandt,&nbsp;Måns Larsson,&nbsp;Olof Enqvist,&nbsp;Oke Gerke,&nbsp;Poul Flemming Høilund-Carlsen","doi":"10.1111/cpf.12793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Carotid atherosclerosis is a major cause of stroke, traditionally diagnosed late. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) with <sup>18</sup>F-sodium fluoride (NaF) detects arterial wall micro-calcification long before macro-calcification becomes detectable by ultrasound, CT or magnetic resonance imaging. However, manual PET/CT processing is time-consuming and requires experience. We compared a convolutional neural network (CNN) approach with manual segmentation of the common carotids.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Segmentation in NaF-PET/CT scans of 29 healthy volunteers and 20 angina pectoris patients were compared for segmented volume (Vol) and mean, maximal, and total standardized uptake values (SUVmean, SUVmax, and SUVtotal). SUVmean was the average of SUVmeans within the VOI, SUVmax the highest SUV in all voxels in the VOI, and SUVtotal the SUVmean multiplied by the Vol of the VOI. Intra and Interobserver variability with manual segmentation was examined in 25 randomly selected scans.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Bias for Vol, SUVmean, SUVmax, and SUVtotal were 1.33 ± 2.06, −0.01 ± 0.05, 0.09 ± 0.48, and 1.18 ± 1.99 in the left and 1.89 ± 1.5, −0.07 ± 0.12, 0.05 ± 0.47, and 1.61 ± 1.47, respectively, in the right common carotid artery. Manual segmentation lasted typically 20 min versus 1 min with the CNN-based approach. Mean Vol deviation at repeat manual segmentation was 14% and 27% in left and right common carotids.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>CNN-based segmentation was much faster and provided SUVmean values virtually identical to manually obtained ones, suggesting CNN-based analysis as a promising substitute of slow and cumbersome manual processing.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10504,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cpf.12793","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cpf.12793","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background

Carotid atherosclerosis is a major cause of stroke, traditionally diagnosed late. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) with 18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) detects arterial wall micro-calcification long before macro-calcification becomes detectable by ultrasound, CT or magnetic resonance imaging. However, manual PET/CT processing is time-consuming and requires experience. We compared a convolutional neural network (CNN) approach with manual segmentation of the common carotids.

Methods

Segmentation in NaF-PET/CT scans of 29 healthy volunteers and 20 angina pectoris patients were compared for segmented volume (Vol) and mean, maximal, and total standardized uptake values (SUVmean, SUVmax, and SUVtotal). SUVmean was the average of SUVmeans within the VOI, SUVmax the highest SUV in all voxels in the VOI, and SUVtotal the SUVmean multiplied by the Vol of the VOI. Intra and Interobserver variability with manual segmentation was examined in 25 randomly selected scans.

Results

Bias for Vol, SUVmean, SUVmax, and SUVtotal were 1.33 ± 2.06, −0.01 ± 0.05, 0.09 ± 0.48, and 1.18 ± 1.99 in the left and 1.89 ± 1.5, −0.07 ± 0.12, 0.05 ± 0.47, and 1.61 ± 1.47, respectively, in the right common carotid artery. Manual segmentation lasted typically 20 min versus 1 min with the CNN-based approach. Mean Vol deviation at repeat manual segmentation was 14% and 27% in left and right common carotids.

Conclusions

CNN-based segmentation was much faster and provided SUVmean values virtually identical to manually obtained ones, suggesting CNN-based analysis as a promising substitute of slow and cumbersome manual processing.

Abstract Image

18F氟化钠PET/CT扫描中颈总动脉的分割:基于人工智能和手动方法的头对头比较
背景颈动脉粥样硬化是中风的主要原因,传统上诊断较晚。使用18F氟化钠(NaF)的正电子发射断层扫描/计算机断层扫描(PET/CT)早在超声、CT或磁共振成像检测到宏观钙化之前就可以检测到动脉壁微钙化。然而,手动PET/CT处理耗时且需要经验。我们将卷积神经网络(CNN)方法与常见颈动脉的手动分割进行了比较。方法比较29名健康志愿者和20名心绞痛患者的NaF PET/CT扫描中的分段体积(Vol)以及平均、最大和总标准化摄取值(SUVmean、SUVmax和SUVtotal)。SUVmean是VOI内SUVmeans的平均值,SUVmax是VOI中所有体素中最高的SUV,SUVtotal是SUVmeann乘以VOI的Vol。在25次随机选择的扫描中检查了手动分割的观察者内和观察者间变异性。结果容积、SUVmean、SUVmax和SUVtotal的偏差为1.33 ± 2.06,−0.01 ± 0.05、0.09 ± 0.48和1.18 ± 左侧1.99和1.89 ± 1.5,−0.07 ± 0.12、0.05 ± 0.47和1.61 ± 在右颈总动脉中分别为1.47。手动分割通常持续20 最小值与1 min使用基于CNN的方法。在左右共同颈动脉中,重复手动分割的平均Vol偏差分别为14%和27%。结论基于CNN的分割速度快得多,并且提供的SUV均值与手动获得的几乎相同,这表明基于CNN的分析是一种很有前途的替代缓慢而繁琐的手动处理的方法。
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
3.40
自引率
5.60%
发文量
62
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging publishes reports on clinical and experimental research pertinent to human physiology in health and disease. The scope of the Journal is very broad, covering all aspects of the regulatory system in the cardiovascular, renal and pulmonary systems with special emphasis on methodological aspects. The focus for the journal is, however, work that has potential clinical relevance. The Journal also features review articles on recent front-line research within these fields of interest. Covered by the major abstracting services including Current Contents and Science Citation Index, Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging plays an important role in providing effective and productive communication among clinical physiologists world-wide.
×
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