MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360953777 · doi:10.1002/mp.16389

Automated segmentation and measurement of the female pelvic floor from the mid‐sagittal plane of 3D ultrasound volumes

2023· article· en· W4360953777 on OpenAlexafffund
Zachary Szentimrey, Golafsoun Ameri, Christopher X. Hong, Rachel Yau Kar Cheung, Eranga Ukwatta, Ahmed Eltahawi

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Medical AssociationUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsUniversity of TorontoCanada Foundation for InnovationGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsSagittal plane3D ultrasoundSegmentationPubic symphysisComputer sciencePelvic floorMedicineReproducibilityArtificial intelligenceComputer visionRadiologyUltrasoundNuclear medicineAnatomyPelvisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) is a valuable imaging tool for evaluating patients with pelvic floor disorders, including pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Currently, measurements of anatomical structures in the mid-sagittal plane of 2D and 3D US volumes are obtained manually, which is time-consuming, has high intra-rater variability, and requires an expert in pelvic floor US interpretation. Manual segmentation and biometric measurement can take 15 min per 2D mid-sagittal image by an expert operator. An automated segmentation method would provide quantitative data relevant to pelvic floor disorders and improve the efficiency and reproducibility of segmentation-based biometric methods. PURPOSE: Develop a fast, reproducible, and automated method of acquiring biometric measurements and organ segmentations from the mid-sagittal plane of female 3D TPUS volumes. METHODS: Our method used a nnU-Net segmentation model to segment the pubis symphysis, urethra, bladder, rectum, rectal ampulla, and anorectal angle in the mid-sagittal plane of female 3D TPUS volumes. We developed an algorithm to extract relevant biometrics from the segmentations. Our dataset included 248 3D TPUS volumes, 126/122 rest/Valsalva split, from 135 patients. System performance was assessed by comparing the automated results with manual ground truth data using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and average absolute difference (AD). Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and time difference were used to compare reproducibility and efficiency between manual and automated methods respectively. High ICC, low AD and reduction in time indicated an accurate and reliable automated system, making TPUS an efficient alternative for POP assessment. Paired t-test and non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test were conducted, with p < 0.05 determining significance. RESULTS: The nnU-Net segmentation model reported average DSC and p values (in brackets), compared to the next best tested model, of 87.4% (<0.0001), 68.5% (<0.0001), 61.0% (0.1), 54.6% (0.04), 49.2% (<0.0001) and 33.7% (0.02) for bladder, rectum, urethra, pubic symphysis, anorectal angle, and rectal ampulla respectively. The average ADs for the bladder neck position, bladder descent, rectal ampulla descent and retrovesical angle were 3.2 mm, 4.5 mm, 5.3 mm and 27.3°, respectively. The biometric algorithm had an ICC > 0.80 for the bladder neck position, bladder descent and rectal ampulla descent when compared to manual measurements, indicating high reproducibility. The proposed algorithms required approximately 1.27 s to analyze one image. The manual ground truths were performed by a single expert operator. In addition, due to high operator dependency for TPUS image collection, we would need to pursue further studies with images collected from multiple operators. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our search in scientific databases (i.e., Web of Science, IEEE Xplore Digital Library, Elsevier ScienceDirect and PubMed), this is the first reported work of an automated segmentation and biometric measurement system for the mid-sagittal plane of 3D TPUS volumes. The proposed algorithm pipeline can improve the efficiency (1.27 s compared to 15 min manually) and has high reproducibility (high ICC values) compared to manual TPUS analysis for pelvic floor disorder diagnosis. Further studies are needed to verify this system's viability using multiple TPUS operators and multiple experts for performing manual segmentation and extracting biometrics from the images.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207