ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2025
Validation of UniverSeg for Interventional Abdominal Angiographic Segmentation.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Automatic segmentation of angiographic structures can aid in assessing vascular disease. While recent deep learning models promise automation, they lack validation on interventional angiographic data. This study investigates the feasibility of angiographic segmentation using in-context learning with the UniverSeg model, which is a cross-learning segmentation model that lacks inherent angiographic training. A retrospective review, after IRB approval, identified 234 patients who underwent interventional fluoroscopy of the celiac axis with iodinated contrast from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2022. From 261 acquisitions, 303 maximum contrast images were selected, each generating a 128 × 128 pixel partition for arterial detail analysis and binary mask creation. Image-mask pairs were divided into three classes of 101 pairs each, based on arterial diameter and bifurcation number. UniverSeg was tested class independently in a fivefold nested cross-validation. Performance analysis for in-context learning determined average model convergence for class sizes from 1 to 81 pairs. The model was further validated by repeating the tests on the inverse segmentation task. Dice similarity coefficients for decreasing diameters were 78.7%, 72.5%, and 59.9% (σ = 5.96, 7.99, 14.29). Balanced average Hausdorff distances were 0.86, 0.71, and 1.16 (σ = 0.37, 0.52, 0.68) pixels, respectively. Inverted mask testing aligned with UniverSeg expectations for out-of-context problem sets. Performance improved with support class size, vessel diameter, and reduced bifurcations, plateauing to within ± 1.34 Dice score at N = 51. This study validates UniverSeg for arterial segmentation in interventional fluoroscopic procedures, supporting vascular disease modeling and imaging research.
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.