Automatic detection of brachytherapy seeds in 3D ultrasound images using a convolutional neural network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel approach for automatic localization of brachytherapy seeds in 3D transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images, using machine learning based algorithm, is presented. 3D radiofrequency ultrasound signals were collected from 13 patients using the linear array of the TRUS probe during the brachytherapy procedure in which needles are used for insertion of stranded seeds. Gold standard for the location of seeds on TRUS data were obtained with the guidance of the complete reconstruction of the seed locations from multiple C-arm fluoroscopy views and used in the creation of the training set. We designed and trained a convolutional neural network (CNN) model that worked on 3D cubical sub-regions of the TRUS images, that will be referred to as patches, representing seed, non-seed within a needle track and non-seed elsewhere in the images. The models were trained with these patches to detect the needle track first and then the individual seeds within the needle track. A leave-one-out cross validation approach was used to test the model on the data from eight of the patients, for whom accurate seed locations were available from fluoroscopic imaging. The total inference time was about 7 min for needle track detection in each patient's image and approximately 1 min for seed detection in each needle, leading to a total seed detection time of less than 15 min. Our seed detection algorithm achieved [Formula: see text] precision, [Formula: see text] recall and [Formula: see text] F1_score. The results from our CNN-based method were compared to manual seed localization performed by an expert. The CNN model yielded higher precision (lower false discovery rate) compared to the manual method. The automated approach requires little modification to the current clinical setups and offers the prospect of application in real time intraoperative dosimetric analysis of the implant.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".