ArticleScientific reports2022
Convolutional neural network for automated segmentation of the liver and its vessels on non-contrast T1 vibe Dixon acquisitions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of hepatic vessels on whole liver proton density fat fraction and R2* quantification.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Article
- Development and Validation of a Modality-Invariant 3D Swin U-Net Transformer for Liver and Spleen Segmentation on Multi-Site Clinical Bi-parametric MR Images.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- MRI-derived quantification of hepatic vessel-to-volume ratios in chronic liver disease using a deep learning approach.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Automatic segmentation of liver structures in multi-phase MRI using variants of nnU-Net and Swin UNETR.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of an uncorrected native T1 mapping sequence for liver fibrosis and inflammation in autoimmune hepatitis: a prospective study using histopathology as reference standard.La Radiologia medica · 2024Article
- Vascular liver segmentation: a narrative review on methods and new insights brought by artificial intelligence.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Review
- Fully automated assessment of the future liver remnant in a blood-free setting via CT before major hepatectomy via deep learning.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Signal Intensity Trajectories Clustering for Liver Vasculature Segmentation and Labeling (LiVaS) on Contrast-Enhanced MR Images: A Feasibility Pilot Study.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence techniques in liver cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Deep Learning Framework for Liver Segmentation fromSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Automated 3D liver segmentation from hepatobiliary phase MRI for enhanced preoperative planning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Large scale crowdsourced radiotherapy segmentations across a variety of cancer anatomic sites.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Progress and clinical translation in hepatocellular carcinoma of deep learning in hepatic vascular segmentation.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the effectiveness of automated segmentation of the liver and its vessels with a convolutional neural network on non-contrast T1 vibe Dixon acquisitions. A dataset of non-contrast T1 vibe Dixon liver magnetic resonance images was labelled slice-by-slice for the outer liver border, portal, and hepatic veins by an expert. A 3D U-Net convolutional neural network was trained with different combinations of Dixon in-phase, opposed-phase, water, and fat reconstructions. The neural network trained with the single-modal in-phase reconstructions achieved a high performance for liver parenchyma (Dice 0.936 ± 0.02), portal veins (0.634 ± 0.09), and hepatic veins (0.532 ± 0.12) segmentation. No benefit of using multi-modal input was observed (p = 1.0 for all experiments), combining in-phase, opposed-phase, fat, and water reconstruction. Accuracy for differentiation between portal and hepatic veins was 99% for portal veins and 97% for hepatic veins in the central region and slightly lower in the peripheral region (91% for portal veins, 80% for hepatic veins). In conclusion, deep learning-based automated segmentation of the liver and its vessels on non-contrast T1 vibe Dixon was highly effective. The single-modal in-phase input achieved the best performance in segmentation and differentiation between portal and hepatic veins.
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.