Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32090137›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2020

Automatic segmentation of brain tumor resections in intraoperative ultrasound images using U-Net.

François-Xavier Carton, Matthieu Chabanas, Florian Le Lann, Jack H Noble

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Patient-Specific Real-Time Segmentation in Trackerless Brain Ultrasound.Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Intraoperative MR Imaging during Glioma Resection.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Enhanced registration of ultrasound volumes by segmentation of resection cavity in neurosurgical procedures.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

François-Xavier CartonUniversity of Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, TIMC-IMAG, Grenoble, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4293-2810
Matthieu ChabanasUniversity of Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, TIMC-IMAG, Grenoble, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1690-3709
Florian Le LannGrenoble Alpes University Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Grenoble, France.
Jack H NobleVanderbilt University, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Nashville, Tennessee, United States.
Institut polytechnique de Grenoble · FRTranslational Innovation in Medicine and Complexity · FRUniversité Grenoble Alpes · FRVanderbilt University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compensate for the intraoperative brain tissue deformation, computer-assisted intervention methods have been used to register preoperative magnetic resonance images with intraoperative images. In order to model the deformation due to tissue resection, the resection cavity needs to be segmented in intraoperative images. We present an automatic method to segment the resection cavity in intraoperative ultrasound (iUS) images. We trained and evaluated two-dimensional (2-D) and three-dimensional (3-D) U-Net networks on two datasets of 37 and 13 cases that contain images acquired from different ultrasound systems. The best overall performing method was the 3-D network, which resulted in a 0.72 mean and 0.88 median Dice score over the whole dataset. The 2-D network also had good results with less computation time, with a median Dice score over 0.8. We also evaluated the sensitivity of network performance to training and testing with images from different ultrasound systems and image field of view. In this application, we found specialized networks to be more accurate for processing similar images than a general network trained with all the data. Overall, promising results were obtained for both datasets using specialized networks. This motivates further studies with additional clinical data, to enable training and validation of a clinically viable deep-learning model for automated delineation of the tumor resection cavity in iUS images.

Indexed as

brain-shiftdeep learningintraoperative ultrasoundresectionsegmentation

Identifiers

PMID32090137
PMCPMC7026519
OpenAlexW3007561132

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.