ArticleJournal of digital imaging2023
A Deep Learning Approach for Automated Bone Removal from Computed Tomography Angiography of the Brain.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Photon-counting CT in neuroradiology: a comprehensive SWOT analysis.European radiology · 2026Review
- Deep learning-based bone removal in head and neck computed tomography angiography: a comparative study with conventional algorithms.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Deep learning segmentation-based bone removal from computed tomography of the brain improves subdural hematoma detection.Journal of neuroradiology = Journal de neuroradiologie · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Advanced visualization techniques such as maximum intensity projection (MIP) and volume rendering (VR) are useful for evaluating neurovascular anatomy on CT angiography (CTA) of the brain; however, interference from surrounding osseous anatomy is common. Existing methods for removing bone from CTA images are limited in scope and/or accuracy, particularly at the skull base. We present a new brain CTA bone removal tool, which addresses many of these limitations. A deep convolutional neural network was designed and trained for bone removal using 72 brain CTAs. The model was tested on 15 CTAs from the same data source and 17 CTAs from an independent external dataset. Bone removal accuracy was assessed quantitatively, by comparing automated segmentation results to manual segmentations, and qualitatively by evaluating VR visualization of the carotid siphons compared to an existing method for automated bone removal. Average Dice overlap between automated and manual segmentations from the internal and external test datasets were 0.986 and 0.979 respectively. This was superior compared to a publicly available noncontrast head CT bone removal algorithm which had a Dice overlap of 0.947 (internal dataset) and 0.938 (external dataset). Our algorithm yielded better VR visualization of the carotid siphons than the publicly available bone removal tool in 14 out of 15 CTAs (93%, chi-square statistic of 22.5, p-value of < 0.00001) from the internal test dataset and 15 out of 17 CTAs (88%, chi-square statistic of 23.1, p-value of < 0.00001) from the external test dataset. Bone removal allowed subjectively superior MIP and VR visualization of vascular anatomy/pathology. The proposed brain CTA bone removal algorithm is rapid, accurate, and allows superior visualization of vascular anatomy and pathology compared to other available techniques and was validated on an independent external dataset.
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.