ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Clinician-Guided Deep Learning Segmentation of Skull Base Pneumatization on Computed Tomography Using 3D Slicer and MONAI Label.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skull base pneumatization is anatomically variable and clinically relevant to temporal bone and transsphenoidal surgical corridors, but manual volumetric segmentation is time-consuming. This retrospective pilot study evaluated a clinician-guided deep learning workflow for mastoid and sphenoid sinus compartment segmentation on bone computed tomography. Images were curated and annotated in 3D Slicer using MONAI Label and separate three-dimensional SegResNet models. The mastoid development dataset comprised 122 side-cases, with 28 reserved side-cases; the sphenoid dataset comprised 117 development and 17 reserved examinations. The best internal-validation Dice scores were 0.8660 for the mastoid model and 0.8750 for the sphenoid model. In AI-assisted correction cohorts, mean Dice ranged from 0.9539 to 0.9691 for mastoid and from 0.9347 to 0.9426 for sphenoid. In independently annotated subsets, AI-to-expert Dice was 0.8083-0.8097 for mastoid and 0.8339-0.8473 for sphenoid, while interobserver Dice was 0.8003 and 0.9136, respectively. AI assistance reduced mean segmentation time by 86.5% for mastoid and 81.4% for sphenoid. These findings support clinician-supervised AI segmentation as an efficient starting point for volumetric assessment.
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.