ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Deep learning assisted detection and segmentation of uterine fibroids using multi-orientation magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reconstruction from multi-planar MRI with foundation models for uterine fibroid analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Ses: a Swin-Unet Edge-aware Segmentation network for uterine fibroid ultrasound images.Biomedical engineering online · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo develop deep learning models for automated detection and segmentation of uterine fibroids using multi-orientation MRI.
methodsPre-treatment sagittal and axial T2-weighted MRI scans acquired from patients diagnosed with uterine fibroids were collected. The proposed segmentation models were constructed based on the three-dimensional nnU-Net framework. Fibroid detection efficacy was assessed, with subgroup analyses by size and location. The segmentation performance was evaluated using Dice similarity coefficients (DSCs), 95% Hausdorff distance (HD95), and average surface distance (ASD).
resultsThe internal dataset comprised 299 patients who were divided into the training set (n = 239) and the internal test set (n = 60). The external dataset comprised 45 patients. The sagittal T2WI model and the axial T2WI model demonstrated recalls of 74.4%/76.4% and precision of 98.9%/97.9% for fibroid detection in the internal test set. The models achieved recalls of 93.7%/95.3% for fibroids ≥ 4 cm. The recalls for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) type 2-5, FIGO types 0\1\2(submucous), fibroids FIGO types 5\6\7(subserous) were 100%/100%, 73.3%/78.6%, and 80.3%/81.9%, respectively. The proposed models demonstrated good performance in segmentation of the uterine fibroids with mean DSCs of 0.789 and 0.804, HD95s of 9.996 and 10.855 mm, and ASDs of 2.035 and 2.115 mm in the internal test set, and with mean DSCs of 0.834 and 0.818, HD95s of 9.971 and 11.874 mm, and ASDs of 2.031 and 2.273 mm in the external test set.
conclusionThe proposed deep learning models showed promise as reliable methods for automating the detection and segmentation of the uterine fibroids, particularly those of clinical relevance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40188260What 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.