Evaluation of U-net segmentation models for infarct volume measurement in acute ischemic stroke: comparison with fixed ADC threshold-based methods

Yoon-Chul Kim; Ji-Eun Lee; Inwu Yu; In-Young Baek; Han-Gil Jeong; Beom-Joon Kim; Joon-Kyung Seong; Jong-Won Chung; Oh Young Bang; Woo-Keun Seo

doi:10.1117/12.2512124

13 March 2019 Evaluation of U-net segmentation models for infarct volume measurement in acute ischemic stroke: comparison with fixed ADC threshold-based methods

Yoon-Chul Kim, Ji-Eun Lee, Inwu Yu, In-Young Baek, Han-Gil Jeong, Beom-Joon Kim, Joon-Kyung Seong, Jong-Won Chung, Oh Young Bang, Woo-Keun Seo

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 10950, Medical Imaging 2019: Computer-Aided Diagnosis; 109502D (2019) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2512124
Event: SPIE Medical Imaging, 2019, San Diego, California, United States

Abstract

Ischemic stroke volume is a strong predictor of functional outcome and may play a role in decision making of reperfusion therapy in the late time window (< 6hr of stroke onset to MRI time) when it is obtained along with penumbra volume. Automatic diffusion lesion segmentation can be performed using a commercial software package and is typically based on a fixed apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) threshold. ADC values alone may not be guaranteed to be highly accurate in the identification of diffusion lesions. Deep learning has the potential to improve the accuracy of diffusion lesion segmentation, provided that a large set of correctly labeled lesion mask data is used for training. The purpose of this study is to evaluate deep learning-based segmentation methods and compare them with three fixed ADC threshold-based methods. U-net was adopted to train a segmentation model. Two U-net models were developed: a model “U-net (DWI+ADC)” trained from DWI and ADC data, and a model “U-net (DWI)” trained from DWI data only. 296 subjects were used for training, and 134 subjects were used for testing. An expert neurologist manually delineated infarct masks on DWI, which served as ground-truth reference. Lesion volume measurements from the two U-net methods and three fixed ADC threshold-based methods were compared against lesion volume measurements from manual segmentation. In testing, the “U-net (DWI+ADC)” method outperformed other methods in lesion volume measurement, with the smallest root-mean-square error of 2.96 ml and the highest Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.997. The proposed method has the potential to automatically measure diffusion lesion volume in a fast and accurate manner, in patients with acute ischemic stroke.

Citation Download Citation

Yoon-Chul Kim, Ji-Eun Lee, Inwu Yu, In-Young Baek, Han-Gil Jeong, Beom-Joon Kim, Joon-Kyung Seong, Jong-Won Chung, Oh Young Bang, and Woo-Keun Seo "Evaluation of U-net segmentation models for infarct volume measurement in acute ischemic stroke: comparison with fixed ADC threshold-based methods ", Proc. SPIE 10950, Medical Imaging 2019: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, 109502D (13 March 2019); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2512124

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available

Members: $17.00

Non-members: $21.00 ADD TO CART

PROCEEDINGS
6 PAGES

DOWNLOAD PAPER SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

GET CITATION

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Get copyright permission Get copyright permission on Copyright Marketplace

KEYWORDS

Diffusion weighted imaging

Diffusion

Image segmentation

Ischemic stroke

Data modeling

Magnetic resonance imaging

Brain

Show All Keywords

Keywords/Phrases

Search In:

Publication Years