| Literature DB >> 33252719 |
Yun Pei1, Wenzhuo Yang2,3, Shangqing Wei4, Rui Cai3, Jialin Li3, Shuxu Guo1, Qiang Li5, Jincheng Wang6, Xueyan Li7,8.
Abstract
Significant inherent extra-articular varus angulation is associated with abnormal postoperative hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle. At present, HKA is manually measured by orthopedic surgeons and it increases the doctors' workload. To automatically determine HKA, a deep learning-based automated method for measuring HKA on the unilateral lower limb X-rays was developed and validated. This study retrospectively selected 398 double lower limbs X-rays during 2018 and 2020 from Jilin University Second Hospital. The images (n = 398) were cropped into unilateral lower limb images (n = 796). The deep neural network was used to segment the head of hip, the knee, and the ankle in the same image, respectively. Then, the mean square error of distance between each internal point of each organ and the organ's boundary was calculated. The point with the minimum mean square error was set as the central point of the organ. HKA was determined using the coordinates of three organs' central points according to the law of cosines. In a quantitative analysis, HKA was measured manually by three orthopedic surgeons with a high consistency (176.90 ° ± 12.18°, 176.95 ° ± 12.23°, 176.87 ° ± 12.25°) as evidenced by the Kandall's W of 0.999 (p < 0.001). Of note, the average measured HKA by them (176.90 ° ± 12.22°) served as the ground truth. The automatically measured HKA by the proposed method (176.41 ° ± 12.08°) was close to the ground truth, showing no significant difference. In addition, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between them is 0.999 (p < 0.001). The average of difference between prediction and ground truth is 0.49°. The proposed method indicates a high feasibility and reliability in clinical practice.Entities:
Keywords: Angle measurement; Deep learning; HKA; X-ray
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33252719 PMCID: PMC7701936 DOI: 10.1007/s13246-020-00951-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Phys Eng Sci Med ISSN: 2662-4729
Fig. 1Study file
Fig. 2Structure of the proposed automatic HKA angle measurement system
The parameters of deep neural network for segmenting organs
| Encoder | Decoder | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Parameters | Channels | Type | Parameters | Channels | ||||
| Kernel size | Strides | Input | Output | Kernel size | Strides | Input | Output | ||
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 3 | 64 | Upsample | – | 2 | 512 | 512 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 64 | 64 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 1024 | 256 |
| Max_pooling | 2 × 2 | 2 | 64 | 64 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 256 | 256 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 64 | 128 | Upsample | – | 2 | 256 | 256 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 128 | 128 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 512 | 128 |
| Max_pooling | 2 × 2 | 2 | 128 | 128 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 128 | 128 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 128 | 256 | Upsample | – | 2 | 128 | 128 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 256 | 256 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 256 | 64 |
| Max_pooling | 2 × 2 | 2 | 256 | 256 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 64 | 64 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 256 | 512 | Upsample | – | 2 | 64 | 64 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 512 | 512 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 128 | 64 |
| Max_pooling | 2 × 2 | 2 | 512 | 512 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 64 | 64 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 512 | 512 | Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 64 | 1 |
| Conv_2d | 3 × 3 | 1 | 512 | 512 | Sigmoid | – | |||
Fig. 3The processing of calculating the central point of organ
Fig. 4The method of calculating the HKA angle. (a) The right lower limb X-ray. (b) The left lower limb X-ray
The dice coefficients of fivefold cross-validation
| Organ | Fold-1 | Fold-2 | Fold-3 | Fold-4 | Fold-5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Head of hip | 0.8208 | 0.8168 | 0.8319 | 0.8244 | 0.8283 |
| Knee | 0.9276 | 0.9237 | 0.9235 | 0.9268 | 0.9241 |
| Ankle bone | 0.9080 | 0.8890 | 0.8985 | 0.9011 | 0.8972 |
Three organs’ segmentation performance of deep learning
| Organ | Dice | Recall | Precision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Head of hip | 0.8318 | 0.8120 | 0.8674 |
| Knee | 0.9301 | 0.9075 | 0.9569 |
| Ankle bone | 0.8983 | 0.9030 | 0.8979 |
Fig. 5Visualization of segmentation result and positioning central points. (a) The ground truth for segmentation. (b) Segmentation result
Fig. 6Boxplot about readers and prediction
Comparison and verification between the prediction and ground truth
| Mean(± std) | Intraclass correlation interval | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| ICC(95%CI) | |||
| Ground truth | 176.90 ° ± 12.22° | 0.999(0.996–0.999) | <0.001 |
| Prediction | 176.41 ° ± 12.08° | ||
Fig. 7Bland–Altman plots about prediction and ground truth
Fig. 8The discontinuous regions of segmentation results
Fig. 9The segmentation results of bad contrast and endoprostheses