Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30840715›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2019

Integration of spatial information in convolutional neural networks for automatic segmentation of intraoperative transrectal ultrasound images.

Nooshin Ghavami, Yipeng Hu, Ester Bonmati, Rachael Rodell, Eli Gibson, Caroline Moore, Dean Barratt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A deep learning method for real-time intraoperative US image segmentation in prostate brachytherapy.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

7 authors.

Nooshin GhavamiUniversity College London, UCL Center for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, London, United Kingdom.
Yipeng HuUniversity College London, UCL Center for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, London, United Kingdom.
Ester BonmatiUniversity College London, UCL Center for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, London, United Kingdom.
Rachael RodellUniversity College London, UCL Center for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, London, United Kingdom.
Eli GibsonUniversity College London, UCL Center for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9207-7280
Caroline MooreUniversity College London, Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, London, United Kingdom.
Dean BarrattUniversity College London, UCL Center for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Image guidance systems that register scans of the prostate obtained using transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and magnetic resonance imaging are becoming increasingly popular as a means of enabling tumor-targeted prostate cancer biopsy and treatment. However, intraoperative segmentation of TRUS images to define the three-dimensional (3-D) geometry of the prostate remains a necessary task in existing guidance systems, which often require significant manual interaction and are subject to interoperator variability. Therefore, automating this step would lead to more acceptable clinical workflows and greater standardization between different operators and hospitals. In this work, a convolutional neural network (CNN) for automatically segmenting the prostate in two-dimensional (2-D) TRUS slices of a 3-D TRUS volume was developed and tested. The network was designed to be able to incorporate 3-D spatial information by taking one or more TRUS slices neighboring each slice to be segmented as input, in addition to these slices. The accuracy of the CNN was evaluated on data from a cohort of 109 patients who had undergone TRUS-guided targeted biopsy, (a total of 4034 2-D slices). The segmentation accuracy was measured by calculating 2-D and 3-D Dice similarity coefficients, on the 2-D images and corresponding 3-D volumes, respectively, as well as the 2-D boundary distances, using a 10-fold patient-level cross-validation experiment. However, incorporating neighboring slices did not improve the segmentation performance in five out of six experiment results, which include varying the number of neighboring slices from 1 to 3 at either side. The up-sampling shortcuts reduced the overall training time of the network, 161 min compared with 253 min without the architectural addition.

Indexed as

convolutional neural networksprostate cancerregistrationsegmentationtransrectal ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID30840715
PMCPMC6102407

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.