Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Exploring Multi-Pathology Brain Segmentation: From Volume-Based to Component-Based Deep Learning Analysis

I. Stathopoulos, R. Stoklasa, MA. Kouri, G. Velonakis, E. Karavasilis, E. Efstathopoulos, L. Serio

. 2024 ; 11 (1) : . [pub] 20241231

Status not-indexed Language English Country Switzerland

Document type Journal Article

Detection and segmentation of brain abnormalities using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is an important task that, nowadays, the role of AI algorithms as supporting tools is well established both at the research and clinical-production level. While the performance of the state-of-the-art models is increasing, reaching radiologists and other experts' accuracy levels in many cases, there is still a lot of research needed on the direction of in-depth and transparent evaluation of the correct results and failures, especially in relation to important aspects of the radiological practice: abnormality position, intensity level, and volume. In this work, we focus on the analysis of the segmentation results of a pre-trained U-net model trained and validated on brain MRI examinations containing four different pathologies: Tumors, Strokes, Multiple Sclerosis (MS), and White Matter Hyperintensities (WMH). We present the segmentation results for both the whole abnormal volume and for each abnormal component inside the examinations of the validation set. In the first case, a dice score coefficient (DSC), sensitivity, and precision of 0.76, 0.78, and 0.82, respectively, were found, while in the second case the model detected and segmented correct (True positives) the 48.8% (DSC ≥ 0.5) of abnormal components, partially correct the 27.1% (0.05 > DSC > 0.5), and missed (False Negatives) the 24.1%, while it produced 25.1% False Positives. Finally, we present an extended analysis between the True positives, False Negatives, and False positives versus their position inside the brain, their intensity at three MRI modalities (FLAIR, T2, and T1ce) and their volume.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25008752
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250422095826.0
007      
ta
008      
250408s2024 sz f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.3390/jimaging11010006 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)39852319
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a sz
100    1_
$a Stathopoulos, Ioannis $u 2nd Department of Radiology, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece $u Technology Department, CERN, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland $1 https://orcid.org/0000000277697534
245    10
$a Exploring Multi-Pathology Brain Segmentation: From Volume-Based to Component-Based Deep Learning Analysis / $c I. Stathopoulos, R. Stoklasa, MA. Kouri, G. Velonakis, E. Karavasilis, E. Efstathopoulos, L. Serio
520    9_
$a Detection and segmentation of brain abnormalities using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is an important task that, nowadays, the role of AI algorithms as supporting tools is well established both at the research and clinical-production level. While the performance of the state-of-the-art models is increasing, reaching radiologists and other experts' accuracy levels in many cases, there is still a lot of research needed on the direction of in-depth and transparent evaluation of the correct results and failures, especially in relation to important aspects of the radiological practice: abnormality position, intensity level, and volume. In this work, we focus on the analysis of the segmentation results of a pre-trained U-net model trained and validated on brain MRI examinations containing four different pathologies: Tumors, Strokes, Multiple Sclerosis (MS), and White Matter Hyperintensities (WMH). We present the segmentation results for both the whole abnormal volume and for each abnormal component inside the examinations of the validation set. In the first case, a dice score coefficient (DSC), sensitivity, and precision of 0.76, 0.78, and 0.82, respectively, were found, while in the second case the model detected and segmented correct (True positives) the 48.8% (DSC ≥ 0.5) of abnormal components, partially correct the 27.1% (0.05 > DSC > 0.5), and missed (False Negatives) the 24.1%, while it produced 25.1% False Positives. Finally, we present an extended analysis between the True positives, False Negatives, and False positives versus their position inside the brain, their intensity at three MRI modalities (FLAIR, T2, and T1ce) and their volume.
590    __
$a NEINDEXOVÁNO
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Stoklasa, Roman $u Technology Department, CERN, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland $u Centre for Biomedical Image Analysis, Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University, 60200 Brno, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000239398824
700    1_
$a Kouri, Maria Anthi $u 2nd Department of Radiology, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece $1 https://orcid.org/0000000232963317
700    1_
$a Velonakis, Georgios $u 2nd Department of Radiology, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece $1 https://orcid.org/000000020050284X
700    1_
$a Karavasilis, Efstratios $u Medical Physics Laboratory, School of Medicine, Democritus University of Thrace, 68100 Alexandroupolis, Greece $1 https://orcid.org/0000000272912231
700    1_
$a Efstathopoulos, Efstathios $u 2nd Department of Radiology, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece $1 https://orcid.org/0000000327473353
700    1_
$a Serio, Luigi $u Technology Department, CERN, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland $1 https://orcid.org/0000000293462663
773    0_
$w MED00216297 $t Journal of imaging $x 2313-433X $g Roč. 11, č. 1 (2024)
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39852319 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250408 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250422095828 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2306474 $s 1245827
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 11 $c 1 $e 20241231 $i 2313-433X $m Journal of imaging $n J Imaging $x MED00216297
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250408

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...