尿结石大小的实际和自动CT测量的比较:一项幻影研究。

IF 2 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Myeong Seong Yoon, Dong-Hyun Jang, Juncheol Lee, Jaehoon Jeong, Do Gwon Kim, Hyojin Lim, Dong Keon Lee, Jaehoon Oh
{"title":"尿结石大小的实际和自动CT测量的比较:一项幻影研究。","authors":"Myeong Seong Yoon, Dong-Hyun Jang, Juncheol Lee, Jaehoon Jeong, Do Gwon Kim, Hyojin Lim, Dong Keon Lee, Jaehoon Oh","doi":"10.1007/s00240-025-01708-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Urinary stone size is key in determining treatment. Although computed tomography (CT) scans are widely used for diagnosing urinary stones, measurements of stone size obtained from CT images may be inaccurate compared to actual size. Twenty-four urinary stone phantoms were 3D printed at three densities (100, 1000, and 3000 Hounsfield units [HU]) and eight sizes. CT images of the phantoms were taken. Nineteen radiologists and 33 emergency physicians from two institutions measured stone sizes on CT images using mediastinum and bone settings. An automated algorithm segmented regions of interest and estimated stone size using pixel HUs. Mean absolute error (MAE) was assessed for the accuracy of each measurement method against known phantom sizes. For the mediastinum setting, MAEs for 100, 1000, and 3000 HU stone phantoms were 1.05 mm ± 0.06, 1.01 mm ± 0.06, and 2.38 mm ± 0.17, respectively. For the bone setting, MAEs were 0.98 mm ± 0.07, 0.55 mm ± 0.10, and 1.91 mm ± 0.06, respectively. For automated measurements, MAEs were 1.16 mm, 0.21 mm, and 2.10 mm, respectively. Participant-to-participant variability was observed across all measurement settings, regardless of the stone density or window used. For stone size measurements on CT images, the bone setting provided more accurate results than the mediastinum setting. Automated measurement methods, which estimate stone size by outlining its edges, were more accurate than manual measurements for 1000 HU stones, the most common stone density. However, for stones with densities above or below 1000 HU, the accuracy of the automated method may decrease.</p>","PeriodicalId":23411,"journal":{"name":"Urolithiasis","volume":"53 1","pages":"71"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11991932/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of actual and automated CT measurements of urinary stone size: a phantom study.\",\"authors\":\"Myeong Seong Yoon, Dong-Hyun Jang, Juncheol Lee, Jaehoon Jeong, Do Gwon Kim, Hyojin Lim, Dong Keon Lee, Jaehoon Oh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00240-025-01708-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Urinary stone size is key in determining treatment. Although computed tomography (CT) scans are widely used for diagnosing urinary stones, measurements of stone size obtained from CT images may be inaccurate compared to actual size. Twenty-four urinary stone phantoms were 3D printed at three densities (100, 1000, and 3000 Hounsfield units [HU]) and eight sizes. CT images of the phantoms were taken. Nineteen radiologists and 33 emergency physicians from two institutions measured stone sizes on CT images using mediastinum and bone settings. An automated algorithm segmented regions of interest and estimated stone size using pixel HUs. Mean absolute error (MAE) was assessed for the accuracy of each measurement method against known phantom sizes. For the mediastinum setting, MAEs for 100, 1000, and 3000 HU stone phantoms were 1.05 mm ± 0.06, 1.01 mm ± 0.06, and 2.38 mm ± 0.17, respectively. For the bone setting, MAEs were 0.98 mm ± 0.07, 0.55 mm ± 0.10, and 1.91 mm ± 0.06, respectively. For automated measurements, MAEs were 1.16 mm, 0.21 mm, and 2.10 mm, respectively. Participant-to-participant variability was observed across all measurement settings, regardless of the stone density or window used. For stone size measurements on CT images, the bone setting provided more accurate results than the mediastinum setting. Automated measurement methods, which estimate stone size by outlining its edges, were more accurate than manual measurements for 1000 HU stones, the most common stone density. However, for stones with densities above or below 1000 HU, the accuracy of the automated method may decrease.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urolithiasis\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"71\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11991932/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urolithiasis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-025-01708-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urolithiasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-025-01708-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尿结石的大小是决定治疗的关键。尽管计算机断层扫描(CT)广泛用于诊断尿路结石,但从CT图像中获得的结石大小测量值与实际大小相比可能不准确。以三种密度(100、1000和3000 Hounsfield单位[HU])和八种尺寸3D打印24个尿石模型。对这些幻影进行CT成像。来自两家机构的19名放射科医生和33名急诊医生使用纵隔和骨骼设置在CT图像上测量结石大小。一个自动算法分割感兴趣的区域和估计石头大小使用像素HUs。平均绝对误差(MAE)评估了每种测量方法对已知幻体尺寸的准确性。纵隔组,100、1000、3000个胡石影的MAEs分别为1.05 mm±0.06、1.01 mm±0.06、2.38 mm±0.17。对于植骨,MAEs分别为0.98 mm±0.07、0.55 mm±0.10和1.91 mm±0.06。对于自动测量,MAEs分别为1.16 mm, 0.21 mm和2.10 mm。在所有测量设置中,无论石头密度或使用的窗口如何,都观察到参与者之间的差异。对于CT图像上的结石大小测量,骨设置提供了比纵隔设置更准确的结果。自动测量方法,通过勾勒出石头的边缘来估计石头的大小,比人工测量1000 HU石头(最常见的石头密度)更准确。然而,对于密度高于或低于1000 HU的石头,自动化方法的准确性可能会降低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of actual and automated CT measurements of urinary stone size: a phantom study.

Urinary stone size is key in determining treatment. Although computed tomography (CT) scans are widely used for diagnosing urinary stones, measurements of stone size obtained from CT images may be inaccurate compared to actual size. Twenty-four urinary stone phantoms were 3D printed at three densities (100, 1000, and 3000 Hounsfield units [HU]) and eight sizes. CT images of the phantoms were taken. Nineteen radiologists and 33 emergency physicians from two institutions measured stone sizes on CT images using mediastinum and bone settings. An automated algorithm segmented regions of interest and estimated stone size using pixel HUs. Mean absolute error (MAE) was assessed for the accuracy of each measurement method against known phantom sizes. For the mediastinum setting, MAEs for 100, 1000, and 3000 HU stone phantoms were 1.05 mm ± 0.06, 1.01 mm ± 0.06, and 2.38 mm ± 0.17, respectively. For the bone setting, MAEs were 0.98 mm ± 0.07, 0.55 mm ± 0.10, and 1.91 mm ± 0.06, respectively. For automated measurements, MAEs were 1.16 mm, 0.21 mm, and 2.10 mm, respectively. Participant-to-participant variability was observed across all measurement settings, regardless of the stone density or window used. For stone size measurements on CT images, the bone setting provided more accurate results than the mediastinum setting. Automated measurement methods, which estimate stone size by outlining its edges, were more accurate than manual measurements for 1000 HU stones, the most common stone density. However, for stones with densities above or below 1000 HU, the accuracy of the automated method may decrease.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Urolithiasis
Urolithiasis UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Official Journal of the International Urolithiasis Society The journal aims to publish original articles in the fields of clinical and experimental investigation only within the sphere of urolithiasis and its related areas of research. The journal covers all aspects of urolithiasis research including the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis, genetics, clinical biochemistry, open and non-invasive surgical intervention, nephrological investigation, chemistry and prophylaxis of the disorder. The Editor welcomes contributions on topics of interest to urologists, nephrologists, radiologists, clinical biochemists, epidemiologists, nutritionists, basic scientists and nurses working in that field. Contributions may be submitted as full-length articles or as rapid communications in the form of Letters to the Editor. Articles should be original and should contain important new findings from carefully conducted studies designed to produce statistically significant data. Please note that we no longer publish articles classified as Case Reports. Editorials and review articles may be published by invitation from the Editorial Board. All submissions are peer-reviewed. Through an electronic system for the submission and review of manuscripts, the Editor and Associate Editors aim to make publication accessible as quickly as possible to a large number of readers throughout the world.
×
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