↓ Skip to main content

Automatic segmentation of the glenohumeral cartilages from magnetic resonance images

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Physics, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Automatic segmentation of the glenohumeral cartilages from magnetic resonance images
Published in
Medical Physics, September 2016
DOI 10.1118/1.4961011
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Neubert, Z. Yang, C. Engstrom, Y. Xia, M. W. Strudwick, S. S. Chandra, J. Fripp, S. Crozier

Abstract

Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging plays a key role in investigating early degenerative disorders and traumatic injuries of the glenohumeral cartilages. Subtle morphometric and biochemical changes of potential relevance to clinical diagnosis, treatment planning, and evaluation can be assessed from measurements derived from in vivo MR segmentation of the cartilages. However, segmentation of the glenohumeral cartilages, using approaches spanning manual to automated methods, is technically challenging, due to their thin, curved structure and overlapping intensities of surrounding tissues. Automatic segmentation of the glenohumeral cartilages from MR imaging is not at the same level compared to the weight-bearing knee and hip joint cartilages despite the potential applications with respect to clinical investigation of shoulder disorders. In this work, the authors present a fully automated segmentation method for the glenohumeral cartilages using MR images of healthy shoulders. The method involves automated segmentation of the humerus and scapula bones using 3D active shape models, the extraction of the expected bone-cartilage interface, and cartilage segmentation using a graph-based method. The cartilage segmentation uses localization, patient specific tissue estimation, and a model of the cartilage thickness variation. The accuracy of this method was experimentally validated using a leave-one-out scheme on a database of MR images acquired from 44 asymptomatic subjects with a true fast imaging with steady state precession sequence on a 3 T scanner (Siemens Trio) using a dedicated shoulder coil. The automated results were compared to manual segmentations from two experts (an experienced radiographer and an experienced musculoskeletal anatomist) using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and mean absolute surface distance (MASD) metrics. Accurate and precise bone segmentations were achieved with mean DSC of 0.98 and 0.93 for the humeral head and glenoid fossa, respectively. Mean DSC scores of 0.74 and 0.72 were obtained for the humeral and glenoid cartilage volumes, respectively. The manual interobserver reliability evaluated by DSC was 0.80 ± 0.03 and 0.76 ± 0.04 for the two cartilages, implying that the automated results were within an acceptable 10% difference. The MASD between the automatic and the corresponding manual cartilage segmentations was less than 0.4 mm (previous studies reported mean cartilage thickness of 1.3 mm). This work shows the feasibility of volumetric segmentation and separation of the glenohumeral cartilages from MR images. To their knowledge, this is the first fully automated algorithm for volumetric segmentation of the individual glenohumeral cartilages from MR images. The approach was validated against manual segmentations from experienced analysts. In future work, the approach will be validated on imaging datasets acquired with various MR contrasts in patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 14 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Engineering 8 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Computer Science 3 6%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 19 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,814,957
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Medical Physics
#5,719
of 7,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,840
of 334,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Physics
#87
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,684 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.