| Literature DB >> 35524293 |
Mifang Li1,2,3, Hanhua Bai1,4,5,6, Feiyuan Zhang3, Yujia Zhou4,5,6, Qiuyu Lin3, Quan Zhou7, Qianjin Feng8,9,10,11, Lingyan Zhang12,13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Notch volume is associated with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Manual tracking of intercondylar notch on MR images is time-consuming and laborious. Deep learning has become a powerful tool for processing medical images. This study aims to develop an MRI segmentation model of intercondylar fossa based on deep learning to automatically measure notch volume, and explore its correlation with ACL injury.Entities:
Keywords: Anterior cruciate ligament injury; Deep learning; Intercondylar fossa; Magnetic resonance imaging
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35524293 PMCID: PMC9074347 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05378-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.562
Fig. 1Flow diagram of patient recruitment
Fig. 2Axial slices of knee MRI showing the measurement of femoral intercondylar notch volume. A The most proximal level of the intercondylar notch. B One of the middle levels of the intercondylar notch. C The most distal level of the intercondylar notch
Fig. 3Illustration of the segmentation model. The U-Net network architecture is structured into an encoder and a decoder. The encoder follows the classic architecture of the convolutional neural network, with each convolutional blocks followed by a rectified linear unit (ReLU) and a maximum polling operation to encode image features at different levels of the network. The decoder up-samples the feature map with subsequent up-convolutions and concatenations with the corresponding encoder blocks. The network has two inputs: the preprocessed original MR images and the outlined ROI of the intercondylar fossa. The segmentation architecture consists of 10 convolutional layers, 11 residual blocks (RBs), two pyramid pooling modules (PSPPooling), five upsampling layers, six combine blocks and a fully connected (FC) layer, and a sigmoid layer. Conv = convolution, RB = residual block, PSPpooling = pyramid scene parsing pooling, FC = fully connected
Fig. 4A Structure of the residual block. Each residual block (RB) consists of two batch normalization layers, two rectified linear unit(ReLU)layers and two 3 × 3 convolutional layers. B The structure of the combine block. Each combine block consists of two inputs, a rectified linear unit(ReLU)layer and a convolutional layer
Fig. 5MR images showing comparison between, A manual segmentation and B automatic segmentation predicted using the Res-UNet convolutional neural network. C Scatterplots and D Bland–Altman plots showing the comparison of volume calculations from the manual and automatic segmentation methods
Average Results for 5-Fold Cross-Validation with Different Networks
| Network | Dice similarity coefficient | Automatic Segmentation Volume (cm3) | Manual Segmentation Volume (cm3) | Relative Error |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| U-Net | 0.914 ± 0.04 | 6.483 ± 1.500 | 6.874 ± 1.644 | 0.061 ± 0.037 |
| Seg-Net | 0.906 ± 0.10 | 6.384 ± 1.484 | 6.874 ± 1.644 | 0.072 ± 0.036 |
| Res-UNet | 0.916 ± 0.04 | 6.576 ± 1.492 | 6.874 ± 1.644 | 0.047 ± 0.036 |
| Dense-UNet | 0.901 ± 0.08 | 6.347 ± 1.474 | 6.874 ± 1.644 | 0.077 ± 0.035 |
| Mobile-UNet | 0.906 ± 0.07 | 6.312 ± 1.452 | 6.874 ± 1.644 | 0.085 ± 0.051 |
Results for the external test dataset with Different Networks
| Network | Dice similarity coefficient | Automatic Segmentation Volume (cm3) | Manual Segmentation Volume (cm3) | Relative Error |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| U-Net | 0.914 ± 0.04 | 7.206 ± 1.497 | 7.421 ± 1.476 | 0.064 ± 0.018 |
| Seg-Net | 0.906 ± 0.10 | 7.184 ± 1.498 | 7.421 ± 1.476 | 0.071 ± 0.016 |
| Res-UNet | 0.916 ± 0.04 | 7.251 ± 1.492 | 7.421 ± 1.476 | 0.054 ± 0.019 |
| Dense-UNet | 0.901 ± 0.08 | 7.169 ± 1.490 | 7.421 ± 1.476 | 0.075 ± 0.016 |
| Mobile-UNet | 0.906 ± 0.07 | 7.178 ± 1.516 | 7.421 ± 1.476 | 0.078 ± 0.013 |
The relative error is expressed as the following: R is the real volume and P is the predicted volume
Mean intercondylar notch volume of ACL-injured, ACL intact, male and female participants
| Age (years) | Notch volume (cm3) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Injured ACL | 30.76 ± 8.08 | 6.12 ± 1.34 | < 0.001 |
| Intact ACL | 33.80 ± 11.74 | 6.95 ± 1.75 | |
| Males | 30.75 ± 8.44 | 6.76 ± 1.51 | < 0.001 |
| Females | 35.95 ± 12.54 | 5.41 ± 1.30 |
Mean intercondylar notch volume of male and female ACL-injured and ACL-intact groups
| Notch volume (cm3) | Gender | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Males | Females | ||
| Injured ACL | 6.33 ± 1.25 | 4.89 ± 1.23 | < 0.001 |
| Intact ACL | 7.66 ± 1.61 | 5.73 ± 1.25 | < 0.001 |
| < 0.001 | < 0.005 | ||