From Consensus to Standardization: Evaluating Deep Learning for Nerve Block Segmentation in Ultrasound Imaging
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Deep learning can automate nerve identification by learning from expert-labeled examples to detect and highlight nerves in ultrasound images. This study aims to evaluate the performance of deep-learning models in identifying nerves for ultrasound-guided nerve blocks. METHODS: A total of 3594 raw ultrasound images were collected from public sources-an open GitHub repository and publicly available YouTube videos-covering 9 nerve block regions: Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP), Femoral Nerve, Posterior Rectus Sheath, Median and Ulnar Nerves, Pectoralis Plane, Sciatic Nerve, Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus, Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus, and Interscalene Brachial Plexus. Of these, 10 images per nerve region were kept for testing, with each image labeled by 10 expert anesthesiologists. The remaining 3504 were labeled by a medical anesthesia resident and augmented to create a diverse training dataset of 25,000 images per nerve region. Additionally, 908 negative ultrasound images, which do not contain the targeted nerve structures, were included to improve model robustness. Ten convolutional neural network-based deep-learning architectures were selected to identify nerve structures. Models were trained using a 5-fold cross-validation approach on an Extended Video Graphics Array (EVGA) GeForce RTX 3090 GPU, with batch size, number of epochs, and the Adam optimizer adjusted to enhance the models' effectiveness. Posttraining, models were evaluated on a set of 10 images per nerve region, using the Dice score (range: 0 to 1, where 1 indicates perfect agreement and 0 indicates no overlap) to compare model predictions with expert-labeled images. Further validation was conducted by 10 medical experts who assessed whether they would insert a needle into the model's predictions. Statistical analyses were performed to explore the relationship between Dice scores and expert responses. RESULTS: The R2U-Net model achieved the highest average Dice score (0.7619) across all nerve regions, outperforming other models (0.7123-0.7619). However, statistically significant differences in model performance were observed only for the TAP nerve region (χ² = 26.4, df = 9, P = .002, ε² = 0.267). Expert evaluations indicated high accuracy in the model predictions, particularly for the Popliteal nerve region, where experts agreed to insert a needle based on all 100 model-generated predictions. Logistic modeling suggested that higher Dice overlap might increase the odds of expert acceptance in the Supraclavicular region (odds ratio [OR] = 8.59 × 10⁴, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33-2.25 × 10¹⁰; P = .073). CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate the potential of deep-learning models, such as R2U-Net, to deliver consistent segmentation results in ultrasound-guided nerve block procedures.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».