RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to develop and validate an automated method to segment the renal cortex on contrast-enhanced abdominal computed tomographic images from kidney donors and to track cortex volume change after donation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-dimensional fully automated renal cortex segmentation method was developed and validated on 37 arterial phase computed tomographic data sets (27 patients, 10 of whom underwent two computed tomographic scans before and after nephrectomy) using leave-one-out strategy. Two expert interpreters manually segmented the cortex slice by slice, and linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots were used to compare automated and manual segmentation. The true-positive and false-positive volume fractions were also calculated to evaluate the accuracy of the proposed method. Cortex volume changes in 10 subjects were also calculated. RESULTS: The linear regression analysis results showed that the automated and manual segmentation methods had strong correlations, with Pearson's correlations of 0.9529, 0.9309, 0.9283, and 0.9124 between intraobserver variation, interobserver variation, automated and user 1, and automated and user 2, respectively (P < .001 for all analyses). The Bland-Altman plots for cortex segmentation also showed that the automated and manual methods had agreeable segmentation. The mean volume increase of the cortex for the 10 subjects was 35.1 ± 13.2% (P < .01 by paired t test). The overall true-positive and false-positive volume fractions for cortex segmentation were 90.15 ± 3.11% and 0.85 ± 0.05%. With the proposed automated method, the time for cortex segmentation was reduced from 20 minutes for manual segmentation to 2 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed method was accurate and efficient and can replace the current subjective and time-consuming manual procedure. The computer measurement confirms the volume of renal cortex increases after kidney donation. Published by Elsevier Inc.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to develop and validate an automated method to segment the renal cortex on contrast-enhanced abdominal computed tomographic images from kidney donors and to track cortex volume change after donation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-dimensional fully automated renal cortex segmentation method was developed and validated on 37 arterial phase computed tomographic data sets (27 patients, 10 of whom underwent two computed tomographic scans before and after nephrectomy) using leave-one-out strategy. Two expert interpreters manually segmented the cortex slice by slice, and linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots were used to compare automated and manual segmentation. The true-positive and false-positive volume fractions were also calculated to evaluate the accuracy of the proposed method. Cortex volume changes in 10 subjects were also calculated. RESULTS: The linear regression analysis results showed that the automated and manual segmentation methods had strong correlations, with Pearson's correlations of 0.9529, 0.9309, 0.9283, and 0.9124 between intraobserver variation, interobserver variation, automated and user 1, and automated and user 2, respectively (P < .001 for all analyses). The Bland-Altman plots for cortex segmentation also showed that the automated and manual methods had agreeable segmentation. The mean volume increase of the cortex for the 10 subjects was 35.1 ± 13.2% (P < .01 by paired t test). The overall true-positive and false-positive volume fractions for cortex segmentation were 90.15 ± 3.11% and 0.85 ± 0.05%. With the proposed automated method, the time for cortex segmentation was reduced from 20 minutes for manual segmentation to 2 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed method was accurate and efficient and can replace the current subjective and time-consuming manual procedure. The computer measurement confirms the volume of renal cortex increases after kidney donation. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Dushyant V Sahani; Neeraj Rastogi; Alan C Greenfield; Sanjeeva P Kalva; Dicken Ko; Sanjay Saini; Gordon Harris; Peter R Mueller Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-04-15 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: R N Low; A G Martinez; S M Steinberg; G D Alzate; K E Kortman; B B Bower; W J Dwyer; S K Prince Journal: Radiology Date: 1998-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Sjoerd W van den Dool; Martin N Wasser; Johan W de Fijter; Jan Hoekstra; Rob J van der Geest Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Toshiyuki Okada; Marius George Linguraru; Masatoshi Hori; Ronald M Summers; Noriyuki Tomiyama; Yoshinobu Sato Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2015-07-04 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Ismail Irmakci; Sarfaraz Hussein; Aydogan Savran; Rita R Kalyani; David Reiter; Chee W Chia; Kenneth W Fishbein; Richard G Spencer; Luigi Ferrucci; Ulas Bagci Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2018-08-30 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Panagiotis Korfiatis; Aleksandar Denic; Marie E Edwards; Adriana V Gregory; Darryl E Wright; Aidan Mullan; Joshua Augustine; Andrew D Rule; Timothy L Kline Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Astrid Velroyen; Martin Bech; Irene Zanette; Jolanda Schwarz; Alexander Rack; Christiane Tympner; Tanja Herrler; Claudia Staab-Weijnitz; Margarita Braunagel; Maximilian Reiser; Fabian Bamberg; Franz Pfeiffer; Mike Notohamiprodjo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 3.240