Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37775589›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2024

External validation, radiological evaluation, and development of deep learning automatic lung segmentation in contrast-enhanced chest CT.

Krit Dwivedi, Michael Sharkey, Samer Alabed, Curtis P Langlotz, Andy J Swift, Christian Bluethgen

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Krit Dwivedi *Department of Infection, Immunity & Cardiovascular Disease, Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. k.dwivedi@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4949-4550
Michael Sharkey *3DLab, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Samer AlabedDepartment of Infection, Immunity & Cardiovascular Disease, Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Curtis P LanglotzStanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging (AIMI), Stanford University, Sheffield, USA.
Andy J Swift *Department of Infection, Immunity & Cardiovascular Disease, Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Christian Bluethgen *Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging (AIMI), Stanford University, Sheffield, USA.
Intel (United States) · USUniversity of Sheffield · GBRoyal Hallamshire Hospital · GBSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 222930/Z/21/ZWellcome Trust 4ward North 203914/Z/16 for Krit Dwivedi (K.D.). Andrew Swift AJS 205188/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThere is a need for CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) lung segmentation models. Clinical translation requires radiological evaluation of model outputs, understanding of limitations, and identification of failure points. This multicentre study aims to develop an accurate CTPA lung segmentation model, with evaluation of outputs in two diverse patient cohorts with pulmonary hypertension (PH) and interstitial lung disease (ILD).

methodsThis retrospective study develops an nnU-Net-based segmentation model using data from two specialist centres (UK and USA). Model was trained (n = 37), tested (n = 12), and clinically evaluated (n = 176) on a diverse 'real-world' cohort of 225 PH patients with volumetric CTPAs. Dice score coefficient (DSC) and normalised surface distance (NSD) were used for testing. Clinical evaluation of outputs was performed by two radiologists who assessed clinical significance of errors. External validation was performed on heterogenous contrast and non-contrast scans from 28 ILD patients.

resultsA total of 225 PH and 28 ILD patients with diverse demographic and clinical characteristics were evaluated. Mean accuracy, DSC, and NSD scores were 0.998 (95% CI 0.9976, 0.9989), 0.990 (0.9840, 0.9962), and 0.983 (0.9686, 0.9972) respectively. There were no segmentation failures. On radiological review, 82% and 71% of internal and external cases respectively had no errors. Eighteen percent and 25% respectively had clinically insignificant errors. Peripheral atelectasis and consolidation were common causes for suboptimal segmentation. One external case (0.5%) with patulous oesophagus had a clinically significant error.

conclusionState-of-the-art CTPA lung segmentation model provides accurate outputs with minimal clinical errors on evaluation across two diverse cohorts with PH and ILD. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinical translation of artificial intelligence models requires radiological review and understanding of model limitations. This study develops an externally validated state-of-the-art model with robust radiological review. Intended clinical use is in techniques such as lung volume or parenchymal disease quantification. KEY POINTS: • Accurate, externally validated CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) lung segmentation model tested in two large heterogeneous clinical cohorts (pulmonary hypertension and interstitial lung disease). • No segmentation failures and robust review of model outputs by radiologists found 1 (0.5%) clinically significant segmentation error. • Intended clinical use of this model is a necessary step in techniques such as lung volume, parenchymal disease quantification, or pulmonary vessel analysis.

Indexed as

Deep LearningHypertension, PulmonaryLung Diseases, InterstitialArtificial IntelligenceHumansLungRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedDeep learningHypertension, pulmonaryLungTomography, X-ray computed

Identifiers

PMID37775589
PMCPMC10957646
OpenAlexW4387164278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.