ArticleMedical physics2015
Computer-aided detection of renal calculi from noncontrast CT images using TV-flow and MSER features.
Article in Medical physics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence: revolutionizing robotic surgery: review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- Review
- Automatic Urinary Stone Detection System for Abdominal Non-Enhanced CT Images Reduces the Burden on Radiologists.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
- A deep learning system for automated kidney stone detection and volumetric segmentation on noncontrast CT scans.Medical physics · 2022Article
- Machine learning applications to enhance patient specific care for urologic surgery.World journal of urology · 2022Review
- Automated Characterization of Pyelocalyceal Anatomy Using CT Urograms to Aid in Management of Kidney Stones.Computer assisted and robotic endoscopy and clinical image-based procedures : 4th International Workshop, CARE 2017, and 6th International Workshop, CLIP 2017, held in conjunction with MICCAI 2017 Quebec City, QC, Canada, September 14, ... · 2017Article
- Progress in Fully Automated Abdominal CT Interpretation.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeRenal calculi are common extracolonic incidental findings on computed tomographic colonography (CTC). This work aims to develop a fully automated computer-aided diagnosis system to accurately detect renal calculi on CTC images.
methodsThe authors developed a total variation (TV) flow method to reduce image noise within the kidneys while maintaining the characteristic appearance of renal calculi. Maximally stable extremal region (MSER) features were then calculated to robustly identify calculi candidates. Finally, the authors computed texture and shape features that were imported to support vector machines for calculus classification. The method was validated on a dataset of 192 patients and compared to a baseline approach that detects calculi by thresholding. The authors also compared their method with the detection approaches using anisotropic diffusion and nonsmoothing.
resultsAt a false positive rate of 8 per patient, the sensitivities of the new method and the baseline thresholding approach were 69% and 35% (p < 1e - 3) on all calculi from 1 to 433 mm(3) in the testing dataset. The sensitivities of the detection methods using anisotropic diffusion and nonsmoothing were 36% and 0%, respectively. The sensitivity of the new method increased to 90% if only larger and more clinically relevant calculi were considered.
conclusionsExperimental results demonstrated that TV-flow and MSER features are efficient means to robustly and accurately detect renal calculi on low-dose, high noise CTC images. Thus, the proposed method can potentially improve diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.