Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29943184›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2019

Fully automated detection and segmentation of meningiomas using deep learning on routine multiparametric MRI.

Kai Roman Laukamp, Frank Thiele, Georgy Shakirin, David Zopfs, Andrea Faymonville, Marco Timmer, David Maintz, Michael Perkuhn, Jan Borggrefe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

72 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Artificial intelligence in neuro-oncology: methodological bases, practical applications and ethical and regulatory issues.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

Kai Roman LaukampInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Frank ThieleInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Georgy ShakirinInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
David ZopfsInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Andrea FaymonvilleDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Marco TimmerDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
David MaintzInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Michael PerkuhnInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Jan BorggrefeInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany. jan.borggrefe@uk-koeln.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2908-7560

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the method of choice for imaging meningiomas. Volumetric assessment of meningiomas is highly relevant for therapy planning and monitoring. We used a multiparametric deep-learning model (DLM) on routine MRI data including images from diverse referring institutions to investigate DLM performance in automated detection and segmentation of meningiomas in comparison to manual segmentations.

methodsWe included 56 of 136 consecutive preoperative MRI datasets [T1/T2-weighted, T1-weighted contrast-enhanced (T1CE), FLAIR] of meningiomas that were treated surgically at the University Hospital Cologne and graded histologically as tumour grade I (n = 38) or grade II (n = 18). The DLM was trained on an independent dataset of 249 glioma cases and segmented different tumour classes as defined in the brain tumour image segmentation benchmark (BRATS benchmark). The DLM was based on the DeepMedic architecture. Results were compared to manual segmentations by two radiologists in a consensus reading in FLAIR and T1CE.

resultsThe DLM detected meningiomas in 55 of 56 cases. Further, automated segmentations correlated strongly with manual segmentations: average Dice coefficients were 0.81 ± 0.10 (range, 0.46-0.93) for the total tumour volume (union of tumour volume in FLAIR and T1CE) and 0.78 ± 0.19 (range, 0.27-0.95) for contrast-enhancing tumour volume in T1CE.

conclusionsThe DLM yielded accurate automated detection and segmentation of meningioma tissue despite diverse scanner data and thereby may improve and facilitate therapy planning as well as monitoring of this highly frequent tumour entity. KEY POINTS: • Deep learning allows for accurate meningioma detection and segmentation • Deep learning helps clinicians to assess patients with meningiomas • Meningioma monitoring and treatment planning can be improved.

Indexed as

Deep LearningAgedFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMeningeal NeoplasmsMeningiomaMiddle AgedArtificial intelligenceBrain neoplasmsMachine learningMagnetic resonance imagingMeningioma

Identifiers

PMID29943184
PMCPMC6291436

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.