Dataset Information

Comparison of manual and semi-automated delineation of regions of interest for radioligand PET imaging analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

As imaging centers produce higher resolution research scans, the number of man-hours required to process regional data has become a major concern. Comparison of automated vs. manual methodology has not been reported for functional imaging. We explored validation of using automation to delineate regions of interest on positron emission tomography (PET) scans. The purpose of this study was to ascertain improvements in image processing time and reproducibility of a semi-automated brain region extraction (SABRE) method over manual delineation of regions of interest (ROIs).

Methods

We compared 2 sets of partial volume corrected serotonin 1a receptor binding potentials (BPs) resulting from manual vs. semi-automated methods. BPs were obtained from subjects meeting consensus criteria for frontotemporal degeneration and from age- and gender-matched healthy controls. Two trained raters provided each set of data to conduct comparisons of inter-rater mean image processing time, rank order of BPs for 9 PET scans, intra- and inter-rater intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), repeatability coefficients (RC), percentages of the average parameter value (RM%), and effect sizes of either method.

Results

SABRE saved approximately 3 hours of processing time per PET subject over manual delineation (p < .001). Quality of the SABRE BP results was preserved relative to the rank order of subjects by manual methods. Intra- and inter-rater ICC were high (>0.8) for both methods. RC and RM% were lower for the manual method across all ROIs, indicating less intra-rater variance across PET subjects' BPs.

Conclusion

SABRE demonstrated significant time savings and no significant difference in reproducibility over manual methods, justifying the use of SABRE in serotonin 1a receptor radioligand PET imaging analysis. This implies that semi-automated ROI delineation is a valid methodology for future PET imaging analysis.

SUBMITTER: Chow TW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1802071 | biostudies-literature | 2007 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of manual and semi-automated delineation of regions of interest for radioligand PET imaging analysis.

Chow Tiffany W TW Takeshita Shinichiro S Honjo Kie K Pataky Christina E CE St Jacques Peggy L PL Kusano Maggie L ML Caldwell Curtis B CB Ramirez Joel J Black Sandra S Verhoeff Nicolaas P L G NP

BMC nuclear medicine 20070129

<h4>Background</h4>As imaging centers produce higher resolution research scans, the number of man-hours required to process regional data has become a major concern. Comparison of automated vs. manual methodology has not been reported for functional imaging. We explored validation of using automation to delineate regions of interest on positron emission tomography (PET) scans. The purpose of this study was to ascertain improvements in image processing time and reproducibility of a semi-automated ...[more]

PMID: 17261193

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Electrocardiogram (ECG) contamination is present in diaphragm electromyography (EMGdi) recordings. Obtaining EMGdi without ECG contamination is crucial for EMG amplitude analysis. Manually selecting EMGdi in between QRS complexes has been most commonly applied in recent years (manual method). We developed a semi-automated analysis method based on Least Mean Square Adaptive Filtering combined with a synchronously recorded separate ECG channel to remove ECG artifacts from the EMGdi signals. We hypothesized that this approach would shorten analysis duration and might minimize the potential for inter-rater disagreement. Aims: We aimed to evaluate agreement between the semi-automated method and the manual method and inter-rater reliability of the manual method. Methods: Electromyography signals of seven patients with COPD were recorded using an esophageal catheter during an exercise test on a cycle ergometer. Four patients subsequently participated in an inspiratory muscle training (IMT) program for 8 weeks. After IMT, the tests were repeated. EMGdi/EMGdiMax as obtained either manually by the two assessors or retrieved from the semi-automated method were compared. Results: Semi-automated EMGdi/EMGdiMax agreed well with values obtained by one of the two manual assessors (assessor 1) both at pre-intervention measurements (mean difference -0.5%, 95% CI: -19.6 to 18.6%) and for the pre/post IMT differences (mean difference 1.2%, 95% CI: -16.8 to 19.2%). Intra-class correlation coefficients between methods were 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94-0.97) at pre-intervention measurements and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.58-0.89) for pre/post IMT differences (both p < 0.001). EMGdi/EMGdiMax from assessor 2 was systematically lower than from assessor 1 and agreed less well with the semi-automated method both at pre-intervention measurements (mean difference: 9.3%, 95% CI: -11.4 to 29.9%) and for pre/post IMT differences (mean difference 7.0%, 95% CI: -20.4 to 34.4%). Analysis duration of the semi-automated method was significantly shorter (29 ± 9 min) than the manual method (82 ± 20 min, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The developed semi-automated method is more time efficient and will be less prone to inter-rater variability that was observed when applying the manual analysis method. It is, therefore, proposed as a new standard for objective EMGdi amplitude analyses in future studies.

Project description:PurposeAccurate contouring of intraprostatic gross tumor volume (GTV) is pivotal for successful delivery of focal therapies and for biopsy guidance in patients with primary prostate cancer (PCa). Contouring of GTVs, using 18-Fluor labeled tracer prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography ([18F]PSMA-1007/PET) has not been examined yet.Patients and methodsTen Patients with primary PCa who underwent [18F]PSMA-1007 PET followed by radical prostatectomy were prospectively enrolled. Coregistered histopathological gross tumor volume (GTV-Histo) was used as standard of reference. PSMA-PET images were contoured on two ways: (1) manual contouring with PET scaling SUVmin-max: 0-10 was performed by three teams with different levels of experience. Team 1 repeated contouring at a different time point, resulting in n = 4 manual contours. (2) Semi-automatic contouring approaches using SUVmax thresholds of 20-50% were performed. Interobserver agreement was assessed for manual contouring by calculating the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and for all approaches sensitivity, specificity were calculated by dividing the prostate in each CT slice into four equal quadrants under consideration of histopathology as standard of reference.ResultsManual contouring yielded an excellent interobserver agreement with a median DSC of 0.90 (range 0.87-0.94). Volumes derived from scaling SUVmin-max 0-10 showed no statistically significant difference from GTV-Histo and high sensitivities (median 87%, range 84-90%) and specificities (median 96%, range 96-100%). GTVs using semi-automatic segmentation applying a threshold of 20-40% of SUVmax showed no significant difference in absolute volumes to GTV-Histo, GTV-SUV50% was significantly smaller. Best performing semi-automatic contour (GTV-SUV20%) achieved high sensitivity (median 93%) and specificity (median 96%). There was no statistically significant difference to SUVmin-max 0-10.ConclusionManual contouring with PET scaling SUVmin-max 0-10 and semi-automatic contouring applying a threshold of 20% of SUVmax achieved high sensitivities and very high specificities and are recommended for [18F]PSMA-1007 PET based focal therapy approaches. Providing high specificities, semi-automatic approaches applying thresholds of 30-40% of SUVmax are recommend for biopsy guidance.

Dataset Information

Comparison of manual and semi-automated delineation of regions of interest for radioligand PET imaging analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Comparison of manual and semi-automated delineation of regions of interest for radioligand PET imaging analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets