How Precise Are Preinterventional Measurements Using Centerline Analysis Applications? Objective Ground Truth Evaluation Reveals Software-Specific Centerline Characteristics.

Hoegen, Philipp; Wörz, Stefan; Müller-Eschner, Matthias; Geisbüsch, Philipp; Liao, Wei; Rohr, Karl; Schmitt, Matthias; Rengier, Fabian; Kauczor, Hans-Ulrich; Von Tengg-Kobligk, Hendrik (2017). How Precise Are Preinterventional Measurements Using Centerline Analysis Applications? Objective Ground Truth Evaluation Reveals Software-Specific Centerline Characteristics. Journal of endovascular therapy, 24(4), pp. 584-594. International Society of Endovascular Specialists 10.1177/1526602817713737

Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)

PURPOSE To evaluate different centerline analysis applications using objective ground truth from realistic aortic aneurysm phantoms with precisely defined geometry and centerlines to overcome the lack of unknown true dimensions in previously published in vivo validation studies. METHODS Three aortic phantoms were created using computer-aided design (CAD) software and a 3-dimensional (3D) printer. Computed tomography angiograms (CTAs) of phantoms and 3 patients were analyzed with 3 clinically approved and 1 research software application. The 3D centerline coordinates, intraluminal diameters, and lengths were validated against CAD ground truth using a dedicated evaluation software platform. RESULTS The 3D centerline position mean error ranged from 0.7±0.8 to 2.9±2.5 mm between tested applications. All applications calculated centerlines significantly different from ground truth. Diameter mean errors varied from 0.5±1.2 to 1.1±1.0 mm among 3 applications, but exceeded 8.0±11.0 mm with one application due to an unsteady distortion of luminal dimensions along the centerline. All tested commercially available software tools systematically underestimated centerline total lengths by -4.6±0.9 mm to -10.4±4.3 mm (maximum error -14.6 mm). Applications with the highest 3D centerline accuracy yielded the most precise diameter and length measurements. CONCLUSION One clinically approved application did not provide reproducible centerline-based analysis results, while another approved application showed length errors that might influence stent-graft choice and procedure success. The variety and specific characteristics of endovascular aneurysm repair planning software tools require scientific evaluation and user awareness.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine (DRNN) > Institute of Diagnostic, Interventional and Paediatric Radiology

UniBE Contributor:

Von Tengg-Kobligk, Hendrik

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

1526-6028

Publisher:

International Society of Endovascular Specialists

Language:

English

Submitter:

Santa Bertina Schiaroli

Date Deposited:

11 Oct 2017 15:02

Last Modified:

11 Oct 2017 15:02

Publisher DOI:

10.1177/1526602817713737

PubMed ID:

28587563

Uncontrolled Keywords:

3D evaluation framework abdominal aortic aneurysm centerline analysis computed tomography angiography endovascular aneurysm repair intra-individual comparison phantom planning software validation

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/101290

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback