Publication details
Variability assessment of manual segmentations of ischemic lesion volume on 24-h non-contrast CT
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2022 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | NEURORADIOLOGY |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00234-021-02855-z |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-021-02855-z |
| Keywords | Ischemic stroke; Ischemic lesion volume; Non-contrast CT |
| Description | Purpose Infarct lesion volume (ILV) may serve as an imaging biomarker for clinical outcomes in the early post-treatment stage in patients with acute ischemic stroke. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter- and intra-rater reliability of manual segmentation of ILV on follow-up non-contrast CT (NCCT) scans. Methods Fifty patients from the Prove-IT study were randomly selected for this analysis. Three raters manually segmented ILV on 24-h NCCT scans, slice by slice, three times. The reference standard for ILV was generated by the Simultaneous Truth And Performance Level estimation (STAPLE) algorithm. Intra- and inter-rater reliability was evaluated, using metrics of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) regarding lesion volume and the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Results Median age of the 50 subjects included was 74.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] 67-80), 54% were women, median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 18 (IQR 11-22), median baseline ASPECTS was 9 (IQR 6-10). The mean reference standard ILV was 92.5 ml (standard deviation (SD) +/- 100.9 ml). The manually segmented ILV ranged from 88.2 +/- 91.5 to 135.5 +/- 119.9 ml (means referring to the variation between readers, SD within readers). Inter-rater ICC was 0.83 (95%CI: 0.76-0.88); intra-rater ICC ranged from 0.85 (95%CI: 0.72-0.92) to 0.95 (95%CI: 0.91-0.97). The mean DSC among the three readers ranged from 65.5 +/- 22.9 to 76.4 +/- 17.1% and the mean overall DSC was 72.8 +/- 23.0%. Conclusion Manual ILV measurements on follow-up CT scans are reliable to measure the radiological outcome despite some variability. |