Semiautomatic vessel wall detection and quantification of wall thickness in computed tomography images of human abdominal aortic aneurysms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Quantitative measurements of wall thickness in human abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) may lead to more accurate methods for the evaluation of their biomechanical environment. METHODS: The authors describe an algorithm for estimating wall thickness in AAAs based on intensity histograms and neural networks involving segmentation of contrast enhanced abdominal computed tomography images. The algorithm was applied to ten ruptured and ten unruptured AAA image data sets. Two vascular surgeons manually segmented the lumen, inner wall, and outer wall of each data set and a reference standard was defined as the average of their segmentations. Reproducibility was determined by comparing the reference standard to lumen contours generated automatically by the algorithm and a commercially available software package. Repeatability was assessed by comparing the lumen, outer wall, and inner wall contours, as well as wall thickness, made by the two surgeons using the algorithm. RESULTS: There was high correspondence between automatic and manual measurements for the lumen area (r = 0.978 and r = 0.996 for ruptured and unruptured aneurysms, respectively) and between vascular surgeons (r = 0.987 and r = 0.992 for ruptured and unruptured aneurysms, respectively). The authors' automatic algorithm showed better results when compared to the reference with an average lumen error of 3.69%, which is less than half the error between the commercially available application Simpleware and the reference (7.53%). Wall thickness measurements also showed good agreement between vascular surgeons with average coefficients of variation of 10.59% (ruptured aneurysms) and 13.02% (unruptured aneurysms). Ruptured aneurysms exhibit significantly thicker walls (1.78 +/- 0.39 mm) than unruptured ones (1.48 +/- 0.22 mm), p = 0.044. CONCLUSIONS: While further refinement is needed to fully automate the outer wall segmentation algorithm, these preliminary results demonstrate the method's adequate reproducibility and low interobserver variability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".