| Literature DB >> 35422751 |
Zhengsong Zhou1, Hongli Wan2, Haoyu Zhang1, Xumiao Chen1, Xiaoyu Wang3, Shiluo Lili2, Tao Zhang2.
Abstract
Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) poses a great threat to human life due to its high incidence and poor prognosis. Identification of the bleeding location and quantification of the volume based on CT images are of great significance for assisting the diagnosis and treatment of ICH. In this study, a region-growing algorithm based on watershed preprocessing (RG-WP) was proposed to segment and quantify the hemorrhage. The lowest points yielded by the watershed algorithm were used as seed points for region growing and then hemorrhage was segmented based on the region growing method. At the same time, to integrate the rich experience of clinicians with the algorithm, manual selection of seed points on the basis of watershed segmentation was performed. With the application of segmentation on CT images of 55 patients with ICH, the performance of the RG-WP algorithm was evaluated by comparing it with manual segmentations delineated by professional clinicians as well as the traditional ABC/2 method and the deep learning algorithm U-net. The mean deviation of hemorrhage volume of the RG-WP algorithm from manual segmentation was -0.12 ml (range: -1.05-1.16), while that of the ABC/2 from the manual was 1.05 ml (range: -0.77-9.57). Strong agreement of the algorithm and the manual was confirmed with a high intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (0.998, 95% CI: 0.997-0.999), which was superior to that of the ABC/2 and the manual (0.972, 95% CI: 0.953-0.984). The sensitivity (Sen), positive predictive value (PPV), dice similarity index (DSI), and Jaccard index (JI) of the RG-WP algorithm compared to the manual were 0.92 ± 0.04, 0.95 ± 0.04, 0.93 ± 0.02, and 0.88 ± 0.04, respectively, showing high consistency. Besides, the accuracy of the algorithm was also comparable to that of the deep learning method U-net, with Sen, PPV, DSI, and JI being 0.91 ± 0.09, 0.91 ± 0.06, 0.91 ± 0.05, and 0.91 ± 0.06, respectively.Entities:
Keywords: CT; ICH; image segmentation; region-growing; watershed algorithm
Year: 2022 PMID: 35422751 PMCID: PMC9002175 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.865023
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Figure 1Workflow diagram of hemorrhage segmentation in this study.
Figure 2Seed point selection results based on watershed algorithm. (A) Original image of brain CT; (B) Segmentation results of marker-based watershed; (C) Seed points generated by watershed algorithm.
Figure 3Results of the first region growing. (A) The original CT image; (B) Segmentation of the first region growing; (C) Restoration of the first region growing results.
Figure 4Results of the second region growing segmentation. (A) The original CT image; (B) Segmentation of the second region growing; (C) Restoration of the second region growing results.
Figure 5An example of segmentation close to the skull. (A) The original CT image; (B) Restoration of the segmentation results.
Summary of segmentations manually by two independent raters.
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Min | 0.66 | 0.43 | 540 | 515 |
| Max | 29.44 | 29.10 | 900 | 850 |
| μ ±σ | 9.74 ± | 9.64 ± | 720.40 ± | 684.32 ± |
| 7.73 | 7.79 | 180.55 | 150.21 | |
Segmentations comparison among the RG-WP algorithm, manual, and ABC/2.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Range (min, max) | (−1.05, 1.16) | (−0.77, 9.57) | (−0.86, 9.37) |
| Mean | −0.12 | 1.05 | 1.18 |
| Median | −0.09 | 0.44 | 0.49 |
| IQR | −0.31, 0.04 | 0.13, 1.41 | 0.11, 1.66 |
| 95% CI | −1.04, 0.80 | −2.28, 4.39 | −2.37, 4.72 |
| ICC (95% CI) | 0.998 (0.997, 0.999) | 0.972 (0.953, 0.984) | 0.968 (0.945, 0.981) |
Figure 6Bland-Altman plots for agreement analysis. (A) RG-WP algorithm vs. manual segmentations. (B) ABC/2 vs. manual segmentations. ICH, intracerebral hemorrhage.
Figure 7Boxplot of similarity metrics.
Figure 8Segmentations by different approaches: (A) the original image; (B) segmentation by standardized U-net; (C) segmentation by the RG-WP algorithm.