ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Segmentation of renal vessels on non-enhanced CT images using deep learning models.
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 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.
- Three-dimensional pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging: an effective imaging technique for early-stage kidney injury in patients with type 2 diabetes.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the possibility of performing renal vessel reconstruction on non-enhanced CT images using deep learning models. MATERIALS AND
methods177 patients' CT scans in the non-enhanced phase, arterial phase and venous phase were chosen. These data were randomly divided into the training set (n = 120), validation set (n = 20) and test set (n = 37). In training set and validation set, a radiologist marked out the right renal arteries and veins on non-enhanced CT phase images using contrast phases as references. Trained deep learning models were tested and evaluated on the test set. A radiologist performed renal vessel reconstruction on the test set without the contrast phase reference, and the results were used for comparison. Reconstruction using the arterial phase and venous phase was used as the gold standard.
resultsWithout the contrast phase reference, both radiologist and model could accurately identify artery and vein main trunk. The accuracy was 91.9% vs. 97.3% (model vs. radiologist) in artery and 91.9% vs. 100% in vein, the difference was insignificant. The model had difficulty identify accessory arteries, the accuracy was significantly lower than radiologist (44.4% vs. 77.8%, p = 0.044). The model also had lower accuracy in accessory veins, but the difference was insignificant (64.3% vs. 85.7%, p = 0.094).
conclusionDeep learning models could accurately recognize the right renal artery and vein main trunk, and accuracy was comparable to that of radiologists. Although the current model still had difficulty recognizing small accessory vessels, further training and model optimization would solve these problems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40358703What 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.