ArticleBMC medical imaging2024
Metal implant segmentation in CT images based on diffusion model.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Anticipating femoral shaft nonunion at 1-3 months: a multimodal framework with automated X‑ray segmentation despite metal implants.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComputed tomography (CT) is widely in clinics and is affected by metal implants. Metal segmentation is crucial for metal artifact correction, and the common threshold method often fails to accurately segment metals. PURPOSE: This study aims to segment metal implants in CT images using a diffusion model and further validate it with clinical artifact images and phantom images of known size.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted on 100 patients who received radiation therapy without metal artifacts, and simulated artifact data were generated using publicly available mask data. The study utilized 11,280 slices for training and verification, and 2,820 slices for testing. Metal mask segmentation was performed using DiffSeg, a diffusion model incorporating conditional dynamic coding and a global frequency parser (GFParser). Conditional dynamic coding fuses the current segmentation mask and prior images at multiple scales, while GFParser helps eliminate high-frequency noise in the mask. Clinical artifact images and phantom images are also used for model validation.
resultsCompared with the ground truth, the accuracy of DiffSeg for metal segmentation of simulated data was 97.89% and that of DSC was 95.45%. The mask shape obtained by threshold segmentation covered the ground truth and DSCs were 82.92% and 84.19% for threshold segmentation based on 2500 HU and 3000 HU. Evaluation metrics and visualization results show that DiffSeg performs better than other classical deep learning networks, especially for clinical CT, artifact data, and phantom data.
conclusionDiffSeg efficiently and robustly segments metal masks in artifact data with conditional dynamic coding and GFParser. Future work will involve embedding the metal segmentation model in metal artifact reduction to improve the reduction effect.
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.