Why the study?
Does semi-automatic segmentation using InsightSNAP accurately segment internal carotid arteries compared to manual segmentation in MR images?
Does semi-automatic segmentation using InsightSNAP accurately segment internal carotid arteries compared to manual segmentation in MR images?
InsightSNAP provides semi-automatic segmentation of internal carotid arteries with approximately 11% under-segmentation and 8% over-segmentation compared to manual methods, though initial thresholding remains challenging.
ITK-SNAP errors indicate need for refinement; leaves open accuracy for clinical carotid MR segmentation pending validation.
Quantification of cervical carotid geometry may facilitate improved clinical decision making and scientific discovery. We set out to evaluate the ability of InsightSNAP (ITK-SNAP), an open-source segmentation program for 3D medical images (http://www.itksnap.org, version 1.4), to semi-automatically segment internal carotid arteries. A sample of five individuals (three normal volunteers, and two diseased patients) were imaged with an MR exam consisting of a MOTSA TOF MRA image volume and multiple black blood images acquired with different contrast weightings. Comparisons were made to a manual segmentation created during simultaneous evaluation of the MOTSA image and the various black blood images (typically PD-weighted, T1-weighted, and T2-weighted). These individuals were selected as a training set to determine acceptable parameters for ITK-SNAP's semi-automatic level sets segmentation method. The conclusion from this training set was that the initial thresholding (assigning probabilities to the intensities of image pixels) in the image pre-processing step was most important to obtaining an acceptable segmentation. Unfortunately no consistent trends emerged in how this threshold should be chosen. Figures of percent over- and under-segmentation were computed as a means of comparing the hand segmented and semi-automatically segmented internal carotids. Overall the under-segmentation by ITK-SNAP (voxels included in the manual segmentation but not in the semiautomated segmentation) was 10.94% ± 6.35% while the over-segmentation (voxels excluded in the manual segmentation but included in the semi-automated segmentation) was 8.16% ± 4.40% defined by reference to the total number of voxels included in the manual segmentation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Spangler et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: