Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22125015›Full record

ArticleNeuroinformatics2012

Automatic segmentation of ventricular cerebrospinal fluid from ischemic stroke CT images.

L E Poh, V Gupta, A Johnson, R Kazmierski, W L Nowinski

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroinformatics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Recommendations for Processing Head CT Data.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2019
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

L E PohBiomedical Imaging Lab, Agency for Science Technology and Research, 30 Biopolis Street, #07-01 Matrix, Singapore, 138671, Singapore.
V Gupta
A Johnson
R Kazmierski
W L Nowinski

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate segmentation of ventricular cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) regions in stroke CT images is important in assessing stroke patients. Manual segmentation is subjective, time consuming and error prone. There are currently no methods dedicated to extracting ventricular CSF regions in stroke CT images. 102 ischemic stroke CT scans (slice thickness between 3 and 6 mm, voxel size in the axial plane between 0.390 and 0.498 mm) were acquired. An automated template-based algorithm is proposed to extract ventricular CSF regions which accounts for the presence of ischemic infarct regions, image noise, and variations in orientation. First, template VT(2) is registered to the scan using landmark-based piecewise linear scaling and then template VT(1) is used to further refine the registration by partial segmentation of the fourth ventricle. A region of interest (ROI) is found using the registered VT(2). Automated thresholding is then applied to the ROI and the artifacts are removed in the final phase. Sensitivity, dice similarity coefficient, volume error, conformity and sensibility of segmentation results were 0.74 ± 0.12, 0.8 ± 0.09, 0.16 ± 0.11, 0.45 ± 0.39, 0.88 ± 0.09, respectively. The processing time for a 512 × 512 × 30 CT scan takes less than 30 s on a 2.49 GHz dual core processor PC with 4 GB RAM. Experiments with clinical stroke CT scans showed that the proposed algorithm can generate acceptable results in the presence of noise, size variations and orientation differences of ventricular systems and in the presence of ischemic infarcts.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtifactsBrain IschemiaCerebral VentriculographyFourth VentricleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility of ResultsStrokeTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.