Search

Opportunistic osteoporosis screening in nondedicated routine computed tomography (CT) is of increasing importance. The purpose of this study was to compare lumbar volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) assessed by a convolutional neural network (CNN)-based framework in routine CT to vBMD from dedicated quantitative CT (QCT), and to evaluate the ability of vBMD and surrogate measurements of Hounsfield units (HU) to distinguish between patients with and without osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VFs). A total of 144 patients (median age: 70.7 years, 93 females) with clinical routine CT (eight different CT scanners, 120 kVp or 140 kVp, with and without intravenous contrast medium) and dedicated QCT acquired within ≤30 days were included. Vertebral measurements included (i) vBMD from the CNN-based approach including automated vertebral body labeling, segmentation, and correction of the contrast media phase for routine CT data (vBMD_OPP), (ii) vBMD from dedicated QCT (vBMD_QCT), and (iii) noncalibrated HU from vertebral bodies of routine CT data as previously proposed for immanent opportunistic osteoporosis screening based on CT attenuation. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for vBMD_QCT versus vBMD_OPP indicated better agreement (ICC = 0.913) than the ICC for vBMD_QCT versus noncalibrated HU (ICC = 0.704). Bland-Altman analysis showed data points from 137 patients (95.1%) within the limits of agreement (LOA) of -23.2 to 25.0 mg/cm3 for vBMD_QCT versus vBMD_OPP. Osteoporosis (vBMD <80 mg/cm3 ) was detected in 89 patients (vBMD_QCT) and 88 patients (vBMD_OPP), whereas no patient crossed the diagnostic thresholds from normal vBMD to osteoporosis or vice versa. In a subcohort of 88 patients (thoracolumbar spine covered by imaging for VF reading), 69 patients showed one or more prevalent VFs, and the performance for discrimination between patients with and without VFs was best for vBMD_OPP (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.862; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.771-0.9

Purpose: To establish and evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) threshold values at different spinal levels, derived from opportunistic quantitative computed tomography (QCT), for the prediction of incident vertebral fractures (VF). Materials and Methods: In this case-control study, 35 incident VF cases (23 women, 12 men; mean age: 67 years) and 70 sex- and age-matched controls were included, based on routine multi detector CT (MDCT) scans of the thoracolumbar spine. Trabecular vBMD was measured from routine baseline CT scans of the thoracolumbar spine using an automated pipeline including vertebral segmentation, asynchronous calibration for HU-to-vBMD conversion, and correction of intravenous contrast medium (https://anduin.bonescreen.de). Threshold values at T1-L5 were calculated for the optimal operating point according to the Youden index and for fixed sensitivities (60 – 85%) in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: vBMD at each single level of the thoracolumbar spine was significantly associated with incident VFs (odds ratio per SD decrease [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI] at T1-T4: 3.28, 1.66–6.49; at T5-T8: 3.28, 1.72–6.26; at T9-T12: 3.37, 1.78–6.36; and at L1-L4: 3.98, 1.97–8.06), independent of adjustment for age, sex, and prevalent VF. AUC showed no significant difference between vertebral levels and was highest at the thoracolumbar junction (AUC = 0.75, 95%-CI = 0.63 - 0.85 for T11-L2). Optimal threshold values increased from lumbar (L1-L4: 52.0 mg/cm³) to upper thoracic spine (T1-T4: 69.3 mg/cm³). At T11-L2, T12-L3 and L1-L4, a threshold of 80.0 mg/cm³ showed sensitivities of 85 - 88%, and specificities of 41 - 49%. To achieve comparable sensitivity (85%) at more superior spinal levels, resulting thresholds were higher: 114.1 mg/cm³ (T1-T4), 92.0 mg/cm³ (T5-T8), 88.2 mg/cm³ (T9-T12). Conclusions: At all levels of the thoracolumbar spine, lower vBMD was associated with incident VFs in an elderly

PurposeOsteoporosis is a highly prevalent skeletal disease that frequently entails vertebral fractures. Areal bone mineral density (BMD) derived from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the reference standard, but has well-known limitations. Texture analysis can provide surrogate markers of tissue microstructure based on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data of the spine, thus potentially improving fracture risk estimation beyond areal BMD. However, it is largely unknown whether MRI-derived texture analysis can predict volumetric BMD (vBMD), or whether a model incorporating texture analysis based on CT and MRI may be capable of differentiating between patients with and without osteoporotic vertebral fractures.Materials and methodsTwenty-six patients (15 females, median age: 73 years, 11 patients showing at least one osteoporotic vertebral fracture) who had CT and 3-Tesla chemical shift encoding-based water-fat MRI (CSE-MRI) available were analyzed. In total, 171 vertebral bodies of the thoracolumbar spine were segmented using an automatic convolutional neural network (CNN)-based framework, followed by extraction of integral and trabecular vBMD using CT data. For CSE-MRI, manual segmentation of vertebral bodies and consecutive extraction of the mean proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and T2* was performed. First-order, second-order, and higher-order texture features were derived from texture analysis using CT and CSE-MRI data. Stepwise multivariate linear regression models were computed using integral vBMD and fracture status as dependent variables.ResultsPatients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures showed significantly lower integral and trabecular vBMD when compared to patients without fractures (p<0.001). For the model with integral vBMD as the dependent variable, T2* combined with three PDFF-based texture features explained 40% of the variance (adjusted R2 [Ra2] = 0.40; p<0.001). Furthermore, regarding the differentiation

With the advent of deep learning algorithms, fully automated radiological image analysis is within reach. In spine imaging, several atlas- and shape-based as well as deep learning segmentation algorithms have been proposed, allowing for subsequent automated analysis of morphology and pathology. The first “Large Scale Vertebrae Segmentation Challenge” (VerSe 2019) showed that these perform well on normal anatomy, but fail in variants not frequently present in the training dataset. Building on that experience, we report on the largely increased VerSe 2020 dataset and results from the second iteration of the VerSe challenge (MICCAI 2020, Lima, Peru). VerSe 2020 comprises annotated spine computed tomography (CT) images from 300 subjects with 4142 fully visualized and annotated vertebrae, collected across multiple centres from four different scanner manufacturers, enriched with cases that exhibit anatomical variants such as enumeration abnormalities (n = 77) and transitional vertebrae (n = 161). Metadata includes vertebral labelling information, voxel-level segmentation masks obtained with a human-machine hybrid algorithm and anatomical ratings, to enable the development and benchmarking of robust and accurate segmentation algorithms.

A multitude of image-based machine learning segmentation and classification algorithms has recently been proposed, offering diagnostic decision support for the identification and characterization of glioma, Covid-19 and many other diseases. Even though these algorithms often outperform human experts in segmentation tasks, their limited reliability, and in particular the inability to detect failure cases, has hindered translation into clinical practice. To address this major shortcoming, we propose an unsupervised quality estimation method for segmentation ensembles. Our primitive solution examines discord in binary segmentation maps to automatically flag segmentation results that are particularly error-prone and therefore require special assessment by human readers. We validate our method both on segmentation of brain glioma in multi-modal magnetic resonance - and of lung lesions in computer tomography images. Additionally, our method provides an adaptive prioritization mechanism to maximize efficacy in use of human expert time by enabling radiologists to focus on the most difficult, yet important cases while maintaining full diagnostic autonomy. Our method offers an intuitive and reliable uncertainty estimation from segmentation ensembles and thereby closes an important gap toward successful translation of automatic segmentation into clinical routine.