Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40908427›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2025

Lung lobe segmentation: performance of open-source MOOSE, TotalSegmentator, and LungMask models compared to a local in-house model.

Elaheh Amini, Ran Klein

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Elaheh AminiSystems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada. eamini@ohri.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-2259-2981
Ran KleinSystems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-2020-04741
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLung lobe segmentation is required to assess lobar function with nuclear imaging before surgical interventions. We evaluated the performance of open-source deep learning-based lung lobe segmentation tools, compared to a similar nnU-Net model trained on a smaller but more representative clinical dataset. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe collated and semi-automatically segmented an internal dataset of 164 computed tomography scans and classified them for task difficulty as easy, moderate, or hard. The performance of three open-source models-multi-organ objective segmentation (MOOSE), TotalSegmentator, and LungMask-was assessed using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), robust Hausdorff distance (rHd95), and normalized surface distance (NSD). Additionally, we trained, validated, and tested an nnU-Net model using our local dataset and compared its performance with that of the other software on the test subset. All models were evaluated for generalizability using an external competition (LOLA11, n = 55).

resultsTotalSegmentator outperformed MOOSE in DSC and NSD across all difficulty levels (p < 0.001), but not in rHd95 (p = 1.000). MOOSE and TotalSegmentator surpassed LungMask across metrics and difficulty classes (p < 0.001). Our model exceeded all other models on the internal dataset (n = 33) in all metrics, across all difficulty classes (p < 0.001), and on the external dataset. Missing lobes were correctly identified only by our model and LungMask in 3 and 1 of 7 cases, respectively.

conclusionOpen-source segmentation tools perform well in straightforward cases but struggle in unfamiliar, complex cases. Training on diverse, specialized datasets can improve generalizability, emphasizing representative data over sheer quantity. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Training lung lobe segmentation models on a local variety of cases improves accuracy, thus enhancing presurgical planning, ventilation-perfusion analysis, and disease localization, potentially impacting treatment decisions and patient outcomes in respiratory and thoracic care. KEY POINTS: Deep learning models trained on non-specialized datasets struggle with complex lung anomalies, yet their real-world limitations are insufficiently assessed. Training an identical model on a smaller yet clinically diverse and representative cohort improved performance in challenging cases. Data diversity outweighs the quantity in deep learning-based segmentation models. Accurate lung lobe segmentation may enhance presurgical assessment of lung lobar ventilation and perfusion function, optimizing clinical decision-making and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Deep LearningLungTomography, X-Ray ComputedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedData variabilityDeep learningImage processing (segmentation)LungTomography (x-ray computed)

Identifiers

PMID40908427
PMCPMC12411369

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.