A Helck1, C Schumann2, J Aumann3, K Thierfelder1, F F Strobl1, M Braunagel1, M Niethammer4, D A Clevert1, R T Hoffmann5, M Reiser1, T Sandner1, C Trumm6. 1. Institute for Clinical Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. 2. Fraunhofer MEVIS, Institute for Medical Image Computing, Bremen, Germany. 3. we-do-IT, Melbourne, Australia. 4. Siemens AG Healthcare, Forchheim, Germany. 5. Institute and Policlinic of Radiology, University Hospital at the Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany. 6. Institute for Clinical Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. christoph.trumm@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate feasibility of automatic software-based path proposals for CT-guided percutaneous biopsies. METHODS: Thirty-three patients (60 [Formula: see text] 12 years) referred for CT-guided biopsy of focal liver lesions were consecutively included. Pre-interventional CT and dedicated software (FraunhoferMeVis Pathfinder) were used for (semi)automatic segmentation of relevant structures. The software subsequently generated three path proposals in downward quality for CT-guided biopsy. Proposed needle paths were compared with consensus proposal of two experts (comparable, less suitable, not feasible). In case of comparable results, equivalent approach to software-based path proposal was used. Quality of segmentation process was evaluated (Likert scale, 1 [Formula: see text] best, 6 [Formula: see text] worst), and time for processing was registered. RESULTS: All biopsies were performed successfully without complications. In 91 % one of the three automatic path proposals was rated comparable to experts' proposal. None of the first proposals was rated not feasible, and 76 % were rated comparable to the experts' proposal. 7 % automatic path proposals were rated not feasible, all being second choice ([Formula: see text]) or third choice ([Formula: see text]). In 79 %, segmentation at least was good. Average total time for establishing automatic path proposal was 42 [Formula: see text] 9 s. CONCLUSION: Automatic software-based path proposal for CT-guided liver biopsies in the majority provides path proposals that are easy to establish and comparable to experts' insertion trajectories.
PURPOSE: To evaluate feasibility of automatic software-based path proposals for CT-guided percutaneous biopsies. METHODS: Thirty-three patients (60 [Formula: see text] 12 years) referred for CT-guided biopsy of focal liver lesions were consecutively included. Pre-interventional CT and dedicated software (FraunhoferMeVis Pathfinder) were used for (semi)automatic segmentation of relevant structures. The software subsequently generated three path proposals in downward quality for CT-guided biopsy. Proposed needle paths were compared with consensus proposal of two experts (comparable, less suitable, not feasible). In case of comparable results, equivalent approach to software-based path proposal was used. Quality of segmentation process was evaluated (Likert scale, 1 [Formula: see text] best, 6 [Formula: see text] worst), and time for processing was registered. RESULTS: All biopsies were performed successfully without complications. In 91 % one of the three automatic path proposals was rated comparable to experts' proposal. None of the first proposals was rated not feasible, and 76 % were rated comparable to the experts' proposal. 7 % automatic path proposals were rated not feasible, all being second choice ([Formula: see text]) or third choice ([Formula: see text]). In 79 %, segmentation at least was good. Average total time for establishing automatic path proposal was 42 [Formula: see text] 9 s. CONCLUSION: Automatic software-based path proposal for CT-guided liver biopsies in the majority provides path proposals that are easy to establish and comparable to experts' insertion trajectories.
Authors: Sanjay Gupta; Michael J Wallace; John F Cardella; Sanjoy Kundu; Donald L Miller; Steven C Rose Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2010-03-20 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Lena Maier-Hein; Aysun Tekbas; Alexander Seitel; Frank Pianka; Sascha A Müller; Stefanie Satzl; Simone Schawo; Boris Radeleff; Ralf Tetzlaff; Alfred M Franz; Beat P Müller-Stich; I Wolf; H-U Kauczor; B M Schmied; H-P Meinzer Journal: Med Phys Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: A J Schmidt; S T Kee; D Y Sze; B L Daniel; M K Razavi; C P Semba; M D Dake Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 1999 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: A E Rajesh; J T Rubinstein; M Ferreira; A P Patel; R A Bly; G D Kohlberg Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 2.924