PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 20, 2020European Radiology Experimental610 citationsOpen Access

Automatic lung segmentation in routine imaging is primarily a data diversity problem, not a methodology problem

JHJohannes HofmanningerFPFlorian PrayerJPJeanny Pan

Key Points

  • To determine the significance of training data diversity in enhancing the accuracy of lung segmentation algorithms.
  • Compared four deep learning approaches and two lung segmentation algorithms.
  • Evaluated performance on routine imaging datasets with six different disease patterns.
  • Analyzed mean Dice similarity coefficients across various training conditions.
  • U-net trained on routine data achieved a DSC of 0.98 ± 0.03 compared to 0.94 ± 0.12 for reference methods (p = 0.024).
  • Training on a diverse dataset increased DSC from 0.94 ± 0.13 (public datasets) to 0.97 ± 0.05 (routine data) (p = 0.024).
  • Mean DSC varied minimally (not over 0.02) across different deep learning approaches on test datasets.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Automated segmentation of anatomical structures is a crucial step in image analysis. For lung segmentation in computed tomography, a variety of approaches exists, involving sophisticated pipelines trained and validated on different datasets. However, the clinical applicability of these approaches across diseases remains limited. METHODS: We compared four generic deep learning approaches trained on various datasets and two readily available lung segmentation algorithms. We performed evaluation on routine imaging data with more than six different disease patterns and three published data sets. RESULTS: Using different deep learning approaches, mean Dice similarity coefficients (DSCs) on test datasets varied not over 0.02. When trained on a diverse routine dataset (n = 36), a standard approach (U-net) yields a higher DSC (0.97 ± 0.05) compared to training on public datasets such as the Lung Tissue Research Consortium (0.94 ± 0.13, p = 0.024) or Anatomy 3 (0.92 ± 0.15, p = 0.001). Trained on routine data (n = 231) covering multiple diseases, U-net compared to reference methods yields a DSC of 0.98 ± 0.03 versus 0.94 ± 0.12 (p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy and reliability of lung segmentation algorithms on demanding cases primarily relies on the diversity of the training data, highlighting the importance of data diversity compared to model choice. Efforts in developing new datasets and providing trained models to the public are critical. By releasing the trained model under General Public License 3.0, we aim to foster research on lung diseases by providing a readily available tool for segmentation of pathological lungs.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hofmanninger et al. (2020) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a056fae8bc215e9180b1656https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-020-00173-2
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper