Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37995707›Full record

ReviewNuklearmedizin. Nuclear medicine2023

Artificial Intelligence-powered automatic volume calculation in medical images - available tools, performance and challenges for nuclear medicine.

Thomas Wendler, Michael C Kreissl, Benedikt Schemmer, Julian Manuel Michael Rogasch, Francesca De Benetti

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nuklearmedizin. Nuclear medicine, 2023. 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Applications of artificial intelligence in nuclear medicine.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Influence of subgroup, location, and tumor volume in medulloblastoma surgery and consideration for second look surgery: a single institution experience.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas WendlerClinical Computational Medical Imaging Research, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Augsburg, Germany.
Michael C KreisslAbteilung für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg, Germany.
Benedikt SchemmerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Germany.
Julian Manuel Michael RogaschDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin,Germany.
Francesca De BenettiComputer-Aided Medical Procedures and Augmented Reality School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Technical University of Munich · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEUniversity Hospital Bonn · DEUniversity Hospital Magdeburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Volumetry is crucial in oncology and endocrinology, for diagnosis, treatment planning, and evaluating response to therapy for several diseases. The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Deep Learning (DL) has significantly accelerated the automatization of volumetric calculations, enhancing accuracy and reducing variability and labor. In this review, we show that a high correlation has been observed between Machine Learning (ML) methods and expert assessments in tumor volumetry; Yet, it is recognized as more challenging than organ volumetry. Liver volumetry has shown progression in accuracy with a decrease in error. If a relative error below 10 % is acceptable, ML-based liver volumetry can be considered reliable for standardized imaging protocols if used in patients without major anomalies. Similarly, ML-supported automatic kidney volumetry has also shown consistency and reliability in volumetric calculations. In contrast, AI-supported thyroid volumetry has not been extensively developed, despite initial works in 3D ultrasound showing promising results in terms of accuracy and reproducibility. Despite the advancements presented in the reviewed literature, the lack of standardization limits the generalizability of ML methods across diverse scenarios. The domain gap, i. e., the difference in probability distribution of training and inference data, is of paramount importance before clinical deployment of AI, to maintain accuracy and reliability in patient care. The increasing availability of improved segmentation tools is expected to further incorporate AI methods into routine workflows where volumetry will play a more prominent role in radionuclide therapy planning and quantitative follow-up of disease evolution.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceNuclear MedicineAlgorithmsHumansLiverReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID37995707
PMCPMC10667065
OpenAlexW4388935621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.