Literature DB >> 33730352

Automated segmentation of an intensity calibration phantom in clinical CT images using a convolutional neural network.

Keisuke Uemura1,2, Yoshito Otake3, Masaki Takao4, Mazen Soufi3, Akihiro Kawasaki3, Nobuhiko Sugano5, Yoshinobu Sato3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In quantitative computed tomography (CT), manual selection of the intensity calibration phantom's region of interest is necessary for calculating density (mg/cm3) from the radiodensity values (Hounsfield units: HU). However, as this manual process requires effort and time, the purposes of this study were to develop a system that applies a convolutional neural network (CNN) to automatically segment intensity calibration phantom regions in CT images and to test the system in a large cohort to evaluate its robustness.
METHODS: This cross-sectional, retrospective study included 1040 cases (520 each from two institutions) in which an intensity calibration phantom (B-MAS200, Kyoto Kagaku, Kyoto, Japan) was used. A training dataset was created by manually segmenting the phantom regions for 40 cases (20 cases for each institution). The CNN model's segmentation accuracy was assessed with the Dice coefficient, and the average symmetric surface distance was assessed through fourfold cross-validation. Further, absolute difference of HU was compared between manually and automatically segmented regions. The system was tested on the remaining 1000 cases. For each institution, linear regression was applied to calculate the correlation coefficients between HU and phantom density.
RESULTS: The source code and the model used for phantom segmentation can be accessed at https://github.com/keisuke-uemura/CT-Intensity-Calibration-Phantom-Segmentation . The median Dice coefficient was 0.977, and the median average symmetric surface distance was 0.116 mm. The median absolute difference of the segmented regions between manual and automated segmentation was 0.114 HU. For the test cases, the median correlation coefficients were 0.9998 and 0.999 for the two institutions, with a minimum value of 0.9863.
CONCLUSION: The proposed CNN model successfully segmented the calibration phantom regions in CT images with excellent accuracy.

Keywords:  Artificial intelligence; Bone mineral density; Deep learning; Phantom segmentation; Quantitative computed tomography; U-net

Year:  2021        PMID: 33730352     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-021-02345-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  12 in total

1.  Phantomless calibration of CT scans for measurement of BMD and bone strength-Inter-operator reanalysis precision.

Authors:  David C Lee; Paul F Hoffmann; David L Kopperdahl; Tony M Keaveny
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 4.398

2.  Comparison of femoral morphology and bone mineral density between femoral neck fractures and trochanteric fractures.

Authors:  Yuki Maeda; Nobuhiko Sugano; Masanobu Saito; Kazuo Yonenobu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-08-20       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  The Effect of Quantitative Computed Tomography Acquisition Protocols on Bone Mineral Density Estimation.

Authors:  Hugo Giambini; Dan Dragomir-Daescu; Paul M Huddleston; Jon J Camp; Kai-Nan An; Ahmad Nassr
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 2.097

Review 4.  Quantitative computed tomography.

Authors:  Judith E Adams
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2009-08-13       Impact factor: 3.528

5.  Automated Muscle Segmentation from Clinical CT Using Bayesian U-Net for Personalized Musculoskeletal Modeling.

Authors:  Yuta Hiasa; Yoshito Otake; Masaki Takao; Takeshi Ogawa; Nobuhiko Sugano; Yoshinobu Sato
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 10.048

6.  Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral density and strength: a tool for osteoporosis management.

Authors:  Joseph J Schreiber; Paul A Anderson; Humberto G Rosas; Avery L Buchholz; Anthony G Au
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 7.  Opportunistic Use of CT Imaging for Osteoporosis Screening and Bone Density Assessment: A Qualitative Systematic Review.

Authors:  Elizabeth B Gausden; Benedict U Nwachukwu; Joseph J Schreiber; Dean G Lorich; Joseph M Lane
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  J A Kanis; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; J-Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  A cross-sectional study on the age-related cortical and trabecular bone changes at the femoral head in elderly female hip fracture patients.

Authors:  Tristan Whitmarsh; Yoshito Otake; Keisuke Uemura; Masaki Takao; Nobuhiko Sugano; Yoshinobu Sato
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Japanese 2011 guidelines for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis--executive summary.

Authors:  Hajime Orimo; Toshitaka Nakamura; Takayuki Hosoi; Masayuki Iki; Kazuhiro Uenishi; Naoto Endo; Hiroaki Ohta; Masataka Shiraki; Toshitsugu Sugimoto; Takao Suzuki; Satoshi Soen; Yoshiki Nishizawa; Hiroshi Hagino; Masao Fukunaga; Saeko Fujiwara
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.617

View more
  1 in total

1.  Development of an open-source measurement system to assess the areal bone mineral density of the proximal femur from clinical CT images.

Authors:  Keisuke Uemura; Yoshito Otake; Masaki Takao; Hiroki Makino; Mazen Soufi; Makoto Iwasa; Nobuhiko Sugano; Yoshinobu Sato
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 2.617

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.