Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39186183›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2024

Automated peripheral nerve segmentation for MR-neurography.

Nedim Christoph Beste, Johann Jende, Moritz Kronlage, Felix Kurz, Sabine Heiland, Martin Bendszus, Hagen Meredig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Nedim Christoph BesteInstitute of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. nedim25@me.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5420-1199
Johann JendeInstitute of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Moritz KronlageInstitute of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Felix KurzDKFZ German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
Sabine HeilandInstitute of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Martin BendszusInstitute of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Hagen MeredigInstitute of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMagnetic resonance neurography (MRN) is increasingly used as a diagnostic tool for peripheral neuropathies. Quantitative measures enhance MRN interpretation but require nerve segmentation which is time-consuming and error-prone and has not become clinical routine. In this study, we applied neural networks for the automated segmentation of peripheral nerves.

methodsA neural segmentation network was trained to segment the sciatic nerve and its proximal branches on the MRN scans of the right and left upper leg of 35 healthy individuals, resulting in 70 training examples, via 5-fold cross-validation (CV). The model performance was evaluated on an independent test set of one-sided MRN scans of 60 healthy individuals.

resultsMean Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) in CV was 0.892 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.888-0.897) with a mean Jaccard index (JI) of 0.806 (95% CI: 0.799-0.814) and mean Hausdorff distance (HD) of 2.146 (95% CI: 2.184-2.208). For the independent test set, DSC and JI were lower while HD was higher, with a mean DSC of 0.789 (95% CI: 0.760-0.815), mean JI of 0.672 (95% CI: 0.642-0.699), and mean HD of 2.118 (95% CI: 2.047-2.190).

conclusionThe deep learning-based segmentation model showed a good performance for the task of nerve segmentation. Future work will focus on extending training data and including individuals with peripheral neuropathies in training to enable advanced peripheral nerve disease characterization. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The results will serve as a baseline to build upon while developing an automated quantitative MRN feature analysis framework for application in routine reading of MRN examinations. KEY POINTS: Quantitative measures enhance MRN interpretation, requiring complex and challenging nerve segmentation. We present a deep learning-based segmentation model with good performance. Our results may serve as a baseline for clinical automated quantitative MRN segmentation.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerPeripheral NervesPeripheral Nervous System DiseasesSciatic NerveArtificial intelligenceMagnetic resonance imagingNeural networks (computer)Peripheral nervous systemSciatic nerve

Identifiers

PMID39186183
PMCPMC11347527

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.