Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38806828›Full record

ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2024

MRI-based Deep Learning Models for Preoperative Breast Volume and Density Assessment Assisting Breast Reconstruction.

Muzi Chen, Jiahua Xing, Lingli Guo

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors.

Muzi Chen *Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China.
Jiahua Xing *Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 33 Badachu Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, 100144, China.
Lingli GuoDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China. guolingli301@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe volume of the implant is the most critical element of breast reconstruction, so it is necessary to accurately assess the preoperative volume of the healthy and affected breasts and select the appropriate implant for placement. Accurate and automated methods for quantitative assessment of breast volume can optimize breast reconstruction surgery and assist physicians in clinical decision making. The aim of this study was to develop an artificial intelligence model for automated segmentation of the breast and measurement of volume. MATERIAL AND

methodsA total of 249 subjects undergoing breast reconstruction surgery were enrolled in this study. Subjects underwent preoperative breast MRI, and the breast region manually outlined by the imaging physician served as the gold standard for volume measurement by the automated segmentation model. In this study, we developed three automated algorithms for automatic segmentation of breast regions, including a simple alignment model, an alignment dynamic encoding model, and a deep learning model. The volumetric agreement between the three automated segmentation algorithms and the breast regions manually segmented by imaging physicians was evaluated by calculating the mean square error (MSE) and intragroup correlation coefficient (ICC), and the reproducibility of the automated segmentation of the breast regions was assessed by the test-retest step.

resultsThe three breast automated segmentation models developed in this study (simple registration model, dynamic programming model, and deep learning model) showed strong ICC with manual segmentation of the breast region, with MSEs of 1.124, 0.693, and 0.781, and ICCs of 0.975 (95% CI, 0.869-0.991), 0.986 (95% CI, 0.967-0.996), and 0.983 (95% CI, 0.961-0.992), respectively. Regarding the test-retest results of breast volume, the dynamic programming model performed the best with an MSE of 0.370 and an ICC of 0.993 (95% CI, 0.982-0.997), followed by the deep learning algorithm with an MSE of 0.741 and an ICC of 0.983 (95% CI, 0.956-0.993), and the simple registration algorithm with an MSE of 0.763 and an ICC of 0.982 (95% CI, 0.949-0.993). The reproducibility of the breast region segmented by the three automated algorithms was higher than that of manual segmentation by different radiologists.

conclusionThe three automated breast segmentation algorithms developed in this study generate accurate and reliable breast regions, enable highly reproducible breast region segmentation and automated volume measurements, and provide a valuable tool for surgical selection of appropriate prostheses. NO LEVEL ASSIGNED: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Indexed as

BreastBreast DensityBreast NeoplasmsDeep LearningMagnetic Resonance ImagingMammaplastyAdultAlgorithmsBreast ImplantsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedOrgan SizePreoperative CareReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesAuto-encodingAutomatic segmentationBreast reconstructionDeep learningMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.