Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorFyllingen, Even Hovig
dc.contributor.authorStensjøen, Anne Line
dc.contributor.authorBerntsen, Erik Magnus
dc.contributor.authorReinertsen, Ingerid
dc.contributor.authorSolheim, Ole
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-28T13:46:03Z
dc.date.accessioned2019-04-11T12:16:36Z
dc.date.available2016-10-28T13:46:03Z
dc.date.available2019-04-11T12:16:36Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationPLoS ONE 2016, 11 (10), 16nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2594277
dc.description-nb_NO
dc.description.abstractTo facilitate a more widespread use of volumetric tumor segmentation in clinical studies, there is an urgent need for reliable, user-friendly segmentation software. The aim of this study was therefore to compare three different software packages for semi-automatic brain tumor segmentation of glioblastoma; namely BrainVoyagerTM QX, ITK-Snap and 3D Slicer, and to make data available for future reference. Pre-operative, contrast enhanced T1-weighted 1.5 or 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans were obtained in 20 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for glioblastoma. MRI scans were segmented twice in each software package by two investigators. Intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software agreement was compared by using differences of means with 95% limits of agreement (LoA), Dice’s similarity coefficients (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD). Time expenditure of segmentations was measured using a stopwatch. Eighteen tumors were included in the analyses. Inter-rater agreement was highest for BrainVoyager with difference of means of 0.19 mL and 95% LoA from -2.42 mL to 2.81 mL. Between-software agreement and 95% LoA were very similar for the different software packages. Intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software DSC were ≥ 0.93 in all analyses. Time expenditure was approximately 41 min per segmentation in BrainVoyager, and 18 min per segmentation in both 3D Slicer and ITK-Snap. Our main findings were that there is a high agreement within and between the software packages in terms of small intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software differences of means and high Dice’s similarity coefficients. Time expenditure was highest for BrainVoyager, but all software packages were relatively time-consuming, which may limit usability in an everyday clinical setting.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleGlioblastoma Segmentation: Comparison of Three Different Software Packagesnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.date.updated2016-10-28T13:46:03Z
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber16nb_NO
dc.source.volume11nb_NO
dc.source.journalPLoS ONEnb_NO
dc.source.issue10nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0164891
dc.identifier.cristin1395357


Tilhørende fil(er)

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal