Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29236220›Full record

ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2018

Automatic lung segmentation in functional SPECT images using active shape models trained on reference lung shapes from CT.

Grigorios-Aris Cheimariotis, Mariam Al-Mashat, Kostas Haris, Anthony H Aletras, Jonas Jögi, Marika Bajc, Nicolaos Maglaveras, Einar Heiberg

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Research progress in lung parenchyma segmentation based on computed tomography].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2021
    Review
  6. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Grigorios-Aris CheimariotisLaboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical-Imaging Technologies, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Mariam Al-MashatDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Kostas HarisLaboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical-Imaging Technologies, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Anthony H AletrasLaboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical-Imaging Technologies, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Jonas JögiDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Marika BajcDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Nicolaos MaglaverasLaboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical-Imaging Technologies, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Einar HeibergDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. einar.heiberg@med.lu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2848-3326
Lund University · SEAristotle University of Thessaloniki · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveImage segmentation is an essential step in quantifying the extent of reduced or absent lung function. The aim of this study is to develop and validate a new tool for automatic segmentation of lungs in ventilation and perfusion SPECT images and compare automatic and manual SPECT lung segmentations with reference computed tomography (CT) volumes.

methodsA total of 77 subjects (69 patients with obstructive lung disease, and 8 subjects without apparent perfusion of ventilation loss) performed low-dose CT followed by ventilation/perfusion (V/P) SPECT examination in a hybrid gamma camera system. In the training phase, lung shapes from the 57 anatomical low-dose CT images were used to construct two active shape models (right lung and left lung) which were then used for image segmentation. The algorithm was validated in 20 patients, comparing its results to reference delineation of corresponding CT images, and by comparing automatic segmentation to manual delineations in SPECT images.

resultsThe Dice coefficient between automatic SPECT delineations and manual SPECT delineations were 0.83 ± 0.04% for the right and 0.82 ± 0.05% for the left lung. There was statistically significant difference between reference volumes from CT and automatic delineations for the right (R = 0.53, p = 0.02) and left lung (R = 0.69, p < 0.001) in SPECT. There were similar observations when comparing reference volumes from CT and manual delineations in SPECT images, left lung (bias was - 10 ± 491, R = 0.60, p = 0.005) right lung (bias 36 ± 524 ml, R = 0.62, p = 0.004).

conclusionAutomated segmentation on SPECT images are on par with manual segmentation on SPECT images. Relative large volumetric differences between manual delineations of functional SPECT images and anatomical CT images confirms that lung segmentation of functional SPECT images is a challenging task. The current algorithm is a first step towards automatic quantification of wide range of measurements.

Indexed as

Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonTomography, X-Ray ComputedAlgorithmsAutomationHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLungPattern Recognition, AutomatedReference StandardsActive shape modelCTImage segmentationV/P SPECT

Identifiers

PMID29236220
PMCPMC5797204
OpenAlexW2772022692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.