Paper detail

Automatic Segmentation of the Great Arteries for Computational Hemodynamic Assessment

Background: Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is increasingly used to assess blood flow conditions in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD). This requires patient-specific anatomy, usually obtained from segmented 3D cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) images. However, segmentation is time-consuming and needs expert input. This study aims to develop and validate a machine learning (ML) method for segmentation of the aorta and pulmonary arteries (PAs) for CFD studies. Methods: 90 CHD patients were retrospectively selected for this study. 3D CMR images were manually segmented to obtain ground-truth (GT) background, aorta and PA labels. These were used to train and optimize a U-Net model. Segmentation performance was primarily evaluated using Dice score. CFD simulations were set up from GT and ML segmentations using a semi-automatic meshing and simulation pipeline. Pressure and velocity fields were computed, and a mean average percentage error (MAPE) was calculated for each vessel pair. A secondary observer (SO) segmented the test dataset to assess inter-observer variability. Friedman tests were used to compare segmentation metrics and flow field errors. Results: The model's Dice score (ML vs GT) was 0.945 for the aorta and 0.885 for the PAs. Differences with the inter-observer Dice score (SO vs GT) and ML vs SO Dice scores were not statistically significant for either aorta or PAs. The ML vs GT MAPEs for pressure and velocity in the aorta were 10.1% and 4.1% respectively, and for the PAs 14.6% and 6.3%, respectively. Inter-observer (SO vs GT) and ML vs SO pressure and velocity MAPEs were of a similar magnitude to ML vs GT. Conclusions: The proposed method can successfully segment the great vessels for CFD, with errors similar to inter-observer variability. This reduces the time and effort needed for CFD analysis, making it more attractive for routine clinical use.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.