Segmentation of kidney ablation zone using deep learning in CT images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kidney tumor thermal ablation procedures create an ablation zone that is planned to cover the tumor and destroy malignant cells. Incorrect identification of the margins of this zone can lead to incomplete treatment, increasing the risk of recurrence, or excessive damage to healthy tissue, leading to complications such as renal dysfunction. Thus, accurate segmentation of the Kidney Ablation Zone (KAZ) is vital for assessing the treatment's efficacy and planning further interventions if necessary. Despite the significant importance of this issue, no research has been conducted yet on the segmentation of KAZ. This research proposes an advanced deep learning-based approach utilizing the Attention U-Net architecture to segment KAZ and address this problem. The proposed workflow leverages the strengths of the U-Net architecture, improved with attention mechanisms, to enhance the network’s ability to focus on the most relevant regions of the images, thereby achieving appropriate segmentations. Our model was trained and evaluated on a local dataset from the London Health Sciences Centre (London, Canada) and comprised 76 patients' annotated ablation zones in kidney CT images. Quantitative analysis demonstrated that the Attention U-Net achieved promising performance metrics, including a 0.7 Dice similarity coefficient and a mean absolute boundary distance of 0.97 mm indicating its robustness and reliability in clinical settings. Furthermore, qualitative results showed that our approach effectively delineates ablation zones, providing clear and accurate boundaries critical for post-procedural assessment and planning.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".