A semi-automatic atrial wall thickness measurement method on CT images produced contours comparable to intra-observer variation of manual expert drawings (endocardium p=0.23, epicardium p=0.18).
Does a semi-automatic atrial wall thickness measurement method on CT images provide comparable results to manual expert segmentation for ablation guidance?
A novel semi-automatic CT image segmentation method for measuring left atrial wall thickness performs comparably to manual expert segmentation, potentially aiding in atrial fibrillation ablation guidance.
valor p: p=0.23
Catheter ablation is an increasingly important curative procedure for atrial fibrillation. Knowledge of the local wall thickness is essential to determine the proper ablation energy. This paper presents the first semi-automatic atrial wall thickness measurement method for ablation guidance. It includes both endocardial and epicardial atrial wall segmentation on CT image data. Segmentation is based on active contours, Otsu's multiple threshold method and hysteresis thresholding. Segmentation results were compared to contours manually drawn by two experts, using repeated measures analysis of variance. The root mean square differences between the semi-automatic and the manually drawn contours were comparable to intra-observer variation (endocardium: p = 0.23, epicardium: p = 0.18). Mean wall thickness difference is significant between one of the experts on one side, and the presented method and the other expert on the other side (p <; 0.001). Wall thicknesses found were in the range of 0.5-5.5mm, corresponding to values presented in literature.
Koppert et al. (Fri,) conducted a other in Atrial fibrillation. Semi-automatic atrial wall thickness measurement method on CT images vs. Contours manually drawn by two experts was evaluated on Root mean square differences between semi-automatic and manually drawn contours (p=0.23). A semi-automatic atrial wall thickness measurement method on CT images produced contours comparable to intra-observer variation of manual expert drawings (endocardium p=0.23, epicardium p=0.18).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: