Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33409788›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2021

Deep learning shows good reliability for automatic segmentation and volume measurement of brain hemorrhage, intraventricular extension, and peripheral edema.

Xianjing Zhao, Kaixing Chen, Ge Wu, Guyue Zhang, Xin Zhou, Chuanfeng Lv, Shiman Wu, Yun Chen, Guotong Xie, Zhenwei Yao

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Xianjing ZhaoShanghai Institute of Medical Imaging, Shanghai, China.
Kaixing ChenPing An Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Ge WuPing An Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Guyue ZhangPing An Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Xin ZhouPing An Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Chuanfeng LvPing An Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Shiman WuDepartment of Radiology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 12 Middle Urumqi Road, Jing'an District, Shanghai, 200040, China.
Yun ChenDepartment of Radiology, Xiangyang Central Hospital, Hubei University of Arts and Science, Xiangyang, China.
Guotong XiePing An Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Zhenwei YaoShanghai Institute of Medical Imaging, Shanghai, China. zwyao@fudan.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5681-4308
Ping An (China)Fudan University · CNCloud Computing Center · CNHubei University of Arts and Science · CNShanghai Medical College of Fudan University · CN

Funding

Shanghai Municipal Health Commission 2019SY061
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate for the first time the performance of a deep learning method based on no-new-Net for fully automated segmentation and volumetric measurements of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), intraventricular extension of intracerebral hemorrhage (IVH), and perihematomal edema (PHE) in primary ICH on CT.

methodsThree hundred and eighty primary ICH patients who underwent CT at hospital arrival were divided into a training cohort (n = 300) and a validation cohort (n = 80). An independent cohort with 80 patients was used for testing. Ground truth (segmentation masks) was manually generated by radiologists. Model performance on lesion segmentation and volumetric measurement of ICH, IVH, and PHE were evaluated by comparing the model results with the segmentations performed by radiologists.

resultsIn the test cohort, the Dice scores of lesion segmentation were 0.92, 0.79, and 0.71 for ICH, IVH, and PHE, respectively. The sensitivities were 0.93 for ICH, 0.88 for IVH, and 0.81 for PHE. The positive predictive values were 0.92, 0.76, and 0.69 for ICH, IVH, and PHE, respectively. Excellent concordance (concordance correlation coefficients [CCCs] ≥ 0.98) of ICH and IVH and good concordance of PHE (CCCs ≥ 0.92) were demonstrated between manually and automatically measured volumes. The model took approximately 15 s to provide automatic segmentation and volume analysis for each patient.

conclusionOur model demonstrates good reliability for automatic segmentation and volume measurement of ICH, IVH, and PHE in primary ICH, which can be useful to reduce the effort and time of doctors to calculate volumes of ICH, IVH, and PHE. KEY POINTS: • Deep learning algorithms can provide automatic and reliable assessment of intracerebral hemorrhage, intraventricular hemorrhage, and perihematomal edema on CT. • Non-contrast CT-based deep learning method can be helpful to provide efficient and accurate measurements of ICH, IVH, and PHE in primary ICH patients, thereby reducing the effort and time of doctors to segment and calculate volumes of ICH, IVH, and PHE in primary ICH patients.

Indexed as

Brain EdemaDeep LearningCerebral HemorrhageEdemaHumansIntracranial HemorrhagesReproducibility of ResultsCerebral hemorrhageDeep learningEdemaTomography, X-ray computed

Identifiers

PMID33409788
OpenAlexW3118277682

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.