File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181a5cc16
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-73949112023
- PMID: 19940657
- WOS: WOS:000272483000015
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Semiautomated segmentation of kidney from high-resolution multidetector computed tomography images using a graph-cuts technique
Title | Semiautomated segmentation of kidney from high-resolution multidetector computed tomography images using a graph-cuts technique |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | CT Graph-cuts Kidney Segmentation Transplant |
Issue Date | 2009 |
Citation | Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 2009, v. 33, n. 6, p. 893-901 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Objectives: To develop a semiautomated segmentation method based on a graph-cuts technique from multidetector computed tomography images for kidney segmentation and to evaluate and compare it with the conventional manual delineation segmentation method. Materials and Methods: We have developed a semiautomated segmentation method that is based on a graph-cuts technique with enhanced features including automated seed growing. Multidetector computed tomography images were obtained from 15 consecutive patients who were being evaluated as possible living donors for kidney transplant. Two observers independently performed the segmentation of the kidney from the multidetector computed tomography images using the manual and semiautomated methods. The efficiency of the 2 methods were measured by segmentation processing times and then compared. The interobserver and method reproducibility was determined by Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), which measures how closely 2 segmented volumes overlap geometrically and the coefficient of variation of volume measurements. Results: The mean segmentation processing time was (manual vs semiautomated, P < 0.001) 96.8 ± 13.6 vs 13.7 ± 3.5 minutes for observer 1 and 44.3 ± 4.7 vs 16.2 ± 5.1 minutes for observer 2. The mean interobserver reproducibility was (manual vs semiautomated, P < 0.001) 93.6 ± 1.6% vs 97.3 ± 0.9% for DSC and 5.3 ± 2.6% vs 2.2 ± 1.3% for coefficient of variation, indicating higher interobserver reproducibility with the semiautomated than manual method. The agreement between the 2 segmentation methods was high (mean intermethod DSC 95.8 ± 1.0% and 94.9 ± 0.8%) for both observers. Conclusions: The semiautomated method was significantly more efficient and reproducible than the manual delineation method for segmentation of kidney from MDCT images. Copyright © 2009 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/316028 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 1.0 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.415 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Shim, Hackjoon | - |
dc.contributor.author | Chang, Samuel | - |
dc.contributor.author | Tao, Cheng | - |
dc.contributor.author | Wang, Jin Hong | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kaya, Diana | - |
dc.contributor.author | Bae, Kyongtae T. | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-08-24T15:49:00Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-08-24T15:49:00Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 2009, v. 33, n. 6, p. 893-901 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0363-8715 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/316028 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objectives: To develop a semiautomated segmentation method based on a graph-cuts technique from multidetector computed tomography images for kidney segmentation and to evaluate and compare it with the conventional manual delineation segmentation method. Materials and Methods: We have developed a semiautomated segmentation method that is based on a graph-cuts technique with enhanced features including automated seed growing. Multidetector computed tomography images were obtained from 15 consecutive patients who were being evaluated as possible living donors for kidney transplant. Two observers independently performed the segmentation of the kidney from the multidetector computed tomography images using the manual and semiautomated methods. The efficiency of the 2 methods were measured by segmentation processing times and then compared. The interobserver and method reproducibility was determined by Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), which measures how closely 2 segmented volumes overlap geometrically and the coefficient of variation of volume measurements. Results: The mean segmentation processing time was (manual vs semiautomated, P < 0.001) 96.8 ± 13.6 vs 13.7 ± 3.5 minutes for observer 1 and 44.3 ± 4.7 vs 16.2 ± 5.1 minutes for observer 2. The mean interobserver reproducibility was (manual vs semiautomated, P < 0.001) 93.6 ± 1.6% vs 97.3 ± 0.9% for DSC and 5.3 ± 2.6% vs 2.2 ± 1.3% for coefficient of variation, indicating higher interobserver reproducibility with the semiautomated than manual method. The agreement between the 2 segmentation methods was high (mean intermethod DSC 95.8 ± 1.0% and 94.9 ± 0.8%) for both observers. Conclusions: The semiautomated method was significantly more efficient and reproducible than the manual delineation method for segmentation of kidney from MDCT images. Copyright © 2009 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography | - |
dc.subject | CT | - |
dc.subject | Graph-cuts | - |
dc.subject | Kidney | - |
dc.subject | Segmentation | - |
dc.subject | Transplant | - |
dc.title | Semiautomated segmentation of kidney from high-resolution multidetector computed tomography images using a graph-cuts technique | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181a5cc16 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 19940657 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-73949112023 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 33 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 6 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 893 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 901 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000272483000015 | - |