MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393115599 · doi:10.1007/s11548-024-03077-3

Deep learning-based automatic pipeline for 3D needle localization on intra-procedural 3D MRI

2024· article· en· W4393115599 on OpenAlexaff
Wenqi Zhou, Xin-Zhou Li, Fatemeh Zabihollahy, David Lu, Holden H. Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSinai Health System
FundersDavid Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los AngelesNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institutes of HealthSiemens Medical Solutions USA
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceDeep learningPipeline (software)3D ultrasound3d modelWorkflowMagnetic resonance imagingComputer visionMedicineUltrasoundRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Accurate and rapid needle localization on 3D magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is critical for MRI-guided percutaneous interventions. The current workflow requires manual needle localization on 3D MRI, which is time-consuming and cumbersome. Automatic methods using 2D deep learning networks for needle segmentation require manual image plane localization, while 3D networks are challenged by the need for sufficient training datasets. This work aimed to develop an automatic deep learning-based pipeline for accurate and rapid 3D needle localization on in vivo intra-procedural 3D MRI using a limited training dataset. METHODS: The proposed automatic pipeline adopted Shifted Window (Swin) Transformers and employed a coarse-to-fine segmentation strategy: (1) initial 3D needle feature segmentation with 3D Swin UNEt TRansfomer (UNETR); (2) generation of a 2D reformatted image containing the needle feature; (3) fine 2D needle feature segmentation with 2D Swin Transformer and calculation of 3D needle tip position and axis orientation. Pre-training and data augmentation were performed to improve network training. The pipeline was evaluated via cross-validation with 49 in vivo intra-procedural 3D MR images from preclinical pig experiments. The needle tip and axis localization errors were compared with human intra-reader variation using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, with p < 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: The average end-to-end computational time for the pipeline was 6 s per 3D volume. The median Dice scores of the 3D Swin UNETR and 2D Swin Transformer in the pipeline were 0.80 and 0.93, respectively. The median 3D needle tip and axis localization errors were 1.48 mm (1.09 pixels) and 0.98°, respectively. Needle tip localization errors were significantly smaller than human intra-reader variation (median 1.70 mm; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The proposed automatic pipeline achieved rapid pixel-level 3D needle localization on intra-procedural 3D MRI without requiring a large 3D training dataset and has the potential to assist MRI-guided percutaneous interventions.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and SurgerySame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207