Deep learning-based automated detection and segmentation of bone and traumatic bone marrow lesions from MRI following an acute ACL tear
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Traumatic bone marrow lesions (BML) are frequently identified on knee MRI scans in patients following an acute full-thickness, complete ACL tear. BMLs coincide with regions of elevated localized bone loss, and studies suggest these may act as a precursor to the development of post-traumatic osteoarthritis. This study addresses the labour-intensive manual assessment of BMLs by using a 3D U-Net for automated identification and segmentation from MRI scans. METHODS: A multi-task learning approach was used to segment both bone and BML from T2 fat-suppressed (FS) fast spin echo (FSE) MRI sequences for BML assessment. Training and testing utilized datasets from individuals with complete ACL tears, employing a five-fold cross-validation approach and pre-processing involved image intensity normalization and data augmentation. A post-processing algorithm was developed to improve segmentation and remove outliers. Training and testing datasets were acquired from different studies with similar imaging protocol to assess the model's performance robustness across different populations and acquisition conditions. RESULTS: The 3D U-Net model exhibited effectiveness in semantic segmentation, while post-processing enhanced segmentation accuracy and precision through morphological operations. The trained model with post-processing achieved a Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of 0.75 ± 0.08 (mean ± std) and a precision of 0.87 ± 0.07 for BML segmentation on testing data. Additionally, the trained model with post-processing achieved a DSC of 0.93 ± 0.02 and a precision of 0.92 ± 0.02 for bone segmentation on testing data. This demonstrates the approach's high accuracy for capturing true positives and effectively minimizing false positives in the identification and segmentation of bone structures. CONCLUSION: Automated segmentation methods are a valuable tool for clinicians and researchers, streamlining the assessment of BMLs and allowing for longitudinal assessments. This study presents a model with promising clinical efficacy and provides a quantitative approach for bone-related pathology research and diagnostics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".