Evidence mapPaperPMID 35201517Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2022

Automated segmentation of liver segment on portal venous phase MR images using a 3D convolutional neural network.

Xinjun Han, Xinru Wu, Shuhui Wang, Lixue Xu, Hui Xu, Dandan Zheng, Niange Yu, Yanjie Hong, Zhixuan Yu, Dawei Yang and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Effective Tumor Annotation for Automated Diagnosis of Liver Cancer.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. A Multi-Task Based Deep Learning Framework With Landmark Detection for MRI Couinaud Segmentation.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

11 authors.

Xinjun Han *Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xinru Wu *Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Shuhui WangWeihai Municipal Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Weihai, China.
Lixue XuDepartment of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Hui XuDepartment of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Dandan ZhengShukun (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, China.
Niange YuShukun (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, China.
Yanjie HongShukun (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, China.
Zhixuan YuShukun (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, China.
Dawei Yang *Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. dawei-yang@vip.163.com.
Zhenghan Yang *Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. yangzhenghan@vip.163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3986-1732

Funding

Beijing Municipal Health Commission, Special Program of Scientific Research on health development in Beijing grants shoufa 2018-2-2023National Natural Science Foundation of China 61871276National Natural Science Foundation of China 62171298National Natural Science Foundation of China 82071876
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe aim to develop and validate a three-dimensional convolutional neural network (3D-CNN) model for automatic liver segment segmentation on MRI images.

methodsThis retrospective study evaluated an automated method using a deep neural network that was trained, validated, and tested with 367, 157, and 158 portal venous phase MR images, respectively. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), mean surface distance (MSD), Hausdorff distance (HD), and volume ratio (RV) were used to quantitatively measure the accuracy of segmentation. The time consumed for model and manual segmentation was also compared. In addition, the model was applied to 100 consecutive cases from real clinical scenario for a qualitative evaluation and indirect evaluation.

resultsIn quantitative evaluation, the model achieved high accuracy for DSC, MSD, HD and RV (0.920, 3.34, 3.61 and 1.01, respectively). Compared to manual segmentation, the automated method reduced the segmentation time from 26 min to 8 s. In qualitative evaluation, the segmentation quality was rated as good in 79% of the cases, moderate in 15% and poor in 6%. In indirect evaluation, 93.4% (99/106) of lesions could be assigned to the correct segment by only referring to the results from automated segmentation.

conclusionThe proposed model may serve as an effective tool for automated anatomical region annotation of the liver on MRI images.

Indexed as

3D-CNNCouinaud classificationLiver segment segmentationMRI

Identifiers

PMID35201517
PMCPMC8873293

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.