A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Scanner-specific optimisation of automated lesion segmentation in MS. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • - This study aimed to evaluate how reliable automatic lesion segmentation tools are when used on MRI scans of people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) across different scanners, focusing on their repeatability and accuracy compared to manual segmentation methods.
  • - Researchers scanned 30 pwMS using three different MRI machines (two 3.0 T and one 1.5 T) and employed various segmentation techniques, including both automated tools and manual methods, to measure their effectiveness.
  • - Results showed that optimizing the segmentation settings for each specific scanner significantly improved accuracy (measured by the Dice similarity coefficient) for one of the software tools (LST) compared to using default settings or a combined approach.

Article Abstract

Background & Objective: Automatic lesion segmentation techniques on MRI scans of people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) could support lesion detection and segmentation in trials and clinical practice. However, knowledge on their reliability across scanners is limited, hampering clinical implementation. The aim of this study was to investigate the within-scanner repeatability and between-scanner reproducibility of lesion segmentation tools in pwMS across three different scanners and examine their accuracy compared to manual segmentations with and without optimization.

Methods: 30 pwMS underwent a scan and rescan on three MRI scanners. GE Discovery MR750 (3.0 T), Siemens Sola (1.5 T) and Siemens Vida (3.0 T)). 3D-FLuid Attenuated Inversion Recovery (3D-FLAIR) and 3D T1-weighted scans were acquired on each scanner. Lesion segmentation involved preprocessing and automatic segmentation using the Lesion Segmentation Toolbox (LST) and nicMSlesions (nicMS) as well as manual segmentation. Both automated segmentation techniques were used with default settings, and with settings optimized to match manual segmentations for each scanner specifically and combined for the three scanners. LST settings were optimized by adjusting the threshold to improve the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for each scanner separately and a combined threshold for all scanners. For nicMS the last layers were retrained, once with the multi-scanner data to represent a combined optimization and once separately for each scanner for scanner specific optimization. Volumes and counts were extracted. DSC was calculated for accuracy, and reliability was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). Differences in DSC between software was tested with a repeated measures ANOVA and when appropriate post-hoc paired t-tests using Bonferroni correction.

Results: Scanner-specific optimization significantly improved DSC for LST compared to default and combined settings, except for the GE scanner. NicMS showed significantly higher DSC for both the scanner-specific and combined optimization than default. Within-scanner repeatability was excellent (ICC>0.9) for volume and counts. Between-scanner ICC for volume between Vida and Sola was higher (0.94-0.99) than between GE MR750 and Vida or Sola (0.18-0.93), with improved ICCs for nicMS scanner-specific (0.87-0.93) compared to others (0.18-0.79). This was not present for Sola vs. Vida where all ICCs were excellent (>0.94).

Conclusion: Scanner-specific optimization strategies proved effective in mitigating inter-scanner variability, addressing the issue of insufficient reproducibility and accuracy found with default settings.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11492079PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2024.103680DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

lesion segmentation
20
segmentation
9
segmentation techniques
8
within-scanner repeatability
8
three scanners
8
manual segmentations
8
default settings
8
settings optimized
8
combined optimization
8
scanner-specific optimization
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!