ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2021
Evaluation of inter- and intra-operator reliability of manual segmentation of femoral metastatic lesions.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Model Benchmarking.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2026Article
- Sizes and shapes of perivascular spaces surrounding murine pial arteries.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2023Article
- Finite Element Model-Computed Mechanical Behavior of Femurs with Metastatic Disease Varies Between Physiologic and Idealized Loading Simulations.Biomedical engineering and computational biology · 2023Article
- Observer Variability in CT Angiography Carotid Segmentation: Assessing Variability to Set Minimum Clinical Performance.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of NeuroimagingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAccurate identification of metastatic lesions is important for improvement in biomechanical models that calculate the fracture risk of metastatic bones. The aim of this study was therefore to assess the inter- and intra-operator reliability of manual segmentation of femoral metastatic lesions.
methodsCT scans of 54 metastatic femurs (19 osteolytic, 17 osteoblastic, and 18 mixed) were segmented two times by two operators. Dice coefficients (DCs) were calculated adopting the quantification that a DC˃0.7 indicates good reliability.
resultsGenerally, rather poor inter- and intra-operator reliability of lesion segmentation were found. Inter-operator DCs were 0.54 (± 0.28) and 0.50 (± 0.32) for the first and second segmentations, respectively, whereas intra-operator DCs were 0.56 (± 0.28) for operator I and 0.71 (± 0.23) for operator II. Larger lesions scored significantly higher DCs in comparison with smaller lesions. Of the femurs with larger mean segmentation volumes, 83% and 93% were segmented with good inter- and intra-operator DCs (> 0.7), respectively. There was no difference between the mean DCs of osteolytic, osteoblastic, and mixed lesions.
conclusionManual segmentation of femoral bone metastases is very challenging and resulted in unsatisfactory mean reliability values. There is a need for development of a segmentation protocol to reduce the inter- and intra-operator segmentation variation as the first step and use of computer-assisted segmentation tools as a second step as this study shows that manual segmentation of femoral metastatic lesions is highly challenging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.