ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Automated volumetric evaluation of intracranial compartments and cerebrospinal fluid distribution on emergency trauma head CT scans to quantify mass effect.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and prognosis of traumatic brain injury based on brain CT scans: a systematic review.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Utilizing Artificial Intelligence for CSF Segmentation and Analysis in Head CT Imaging: A Systematic Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- AI-Augmented Quantitative MRI Predicts Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- AI-Driven Innovations in Neuroradiology and Neurosurgery: Scoping Review of Current Evidence and Future Directions.Cancers · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Segmentation of a Falx Cerebri Calcification on Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: A Case Report.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intracranial space is divided into three compartments by the falx cerebri and tentorium cerebelli. We assessed whether cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) distribution evaluated by a specifically developed deep-learning neural network (DLNN) could assist in quantifying mass effect. Methods: Head trauma CT scans from a high-volume emergency department between 2018 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Manual segmentations of intracranial compartments and CSF served as the ground truth to develop a DLNN model to automate the segmentation process. Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) was used to evaluate the segmentation performance. Supratentorial CSF Ratio was calculated by dividing the volume of CSF on the side with reduced CSF reserve by the volume of CSF on the opposite side. Results: Two hundred and seventy-four patients (mean age, 61 years ± 18.6) after traumatic brain injury (TBI) who had an emergency head CT scan were included. The average DSC for training and validation datasets were respectively: 0.782 and 0.765. Lower DSC were observed in the segmentation of CSF, respectively 0.589, 0.615, and 0.572 for the right supratentorial, left supratentorial, and infratentorial CSF regions in the training dataset, and slightly lower values in the validation dataset, respectively 0.567, 0.574, and 0.556. Twenty-two patients (8%) had midline shift exceeding 5 mm, and 24 (8.8%) presented with high/mixed density lesion exceeding >25 ml. Fifty-five patients (20.1%) exhibited mass effect requiring neurosurgical treatment. They had lower supratentorial CSF volume and lower Supratentorial CSF Ratio (both Conclusion: CSF distribution may be presented as quantifiable ratios that help to predict surgery in patients after TBI. Automated segmentation of intracranial compartments using the DLNN model demonstrates a potential of artificial intelligence in quantifying mass effect. Further validation of the described method is necessary to confirm its efficacy in triaging patients and identifying those who require neurosurgical treatment.
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.