Key result
Automated intra-subject registration-based segmentation achieved comparable quantitative endpoints to manual segmentation for abdominal and organ fat quantification.
Why the study?
Does automated intra-subject registration-based segmentation provide comparable accuracy to manual segmentation for measuring abdominal fat and organ fat fractions from water-fat MRI?
Population
15 subjects
Comparison
Automated intra-subject registration-based… vs Manual segmentation performed twice for each…
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
Supports automated abdominal fat quantification in research workflows; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Observational (n=15)
Does automated intra-subject registration-based segmentation provide comparable accuracy to manual segmentation for measuring abdominal fat and organ fat fractions from water-fat MRI?
Automated intra-subject registration-based segmentation of abdominal and organ fat from water-fat MRI achieves comparable quantitative endpoints to manual segmentation.
Joshi et al. (2012) conducted an observational in Abdominal fat measurement (n=15). Automated intra-subject registration-based segmentation algorithm vs. Manual segmentation was evaluated on Dice coefficients and linear regression of SAT and VAT volumes, organ volumes, and hepatic and pancreatic fat fractions. Automated intra-subject registration-based segmentation achieved comparable quantitative endpoints to manual segmentation for abdominal and organ fat quantification.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: