Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients
Yıl: 2023 Cilt: 29 Sayı: 6 Sayfa Aralığı: 717 - 723 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 İndeks Tarihi: 31-07-2023
Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients
Öz: BACKGROUND: Examination of all 24 ribs on axial computed tomography (CT) slices might become a leeway and rib fractures (RF) may easily overlook in daily practice. Rib unfolding (RU), a computer-assisted software, that promises rapid assessment of the ribs in a two-dimensional plan, was developed to facilitate rib evaluation. We aimed to evaluate the reliability and reproducibility of RU software for RF detection on CT and to determine the accelerating effect to determine any drawback of RU application. METHODS: Fifty-one patients with thoracic trauma formed the sample to be assessed by the observers. The characterization and distribution of RFs on CT images in this sample were recorded independently by the non-observers. Regarding the presence or absence of RF, CT images were assessed blindedly by two radiologists with 5 years (observer-A) and 18 years (observer-B) of experience in thoracic radiology. Each observer assessed the axial CT and RU images on different days under non-observer supervision. RESULTS: A total of 113 RFs were detected in 22 patients. The mean evaluation time for the axial CT images was 146.64 s for observer- A and 119.29 s for observer-B. The mean evaluation time for RU images was 66.44 s for observer-A and 32.66 s for observer-B. A statistically significant decrease was observed between the evaluation periods of observer-A and observer-B with RU software compared to the axial CT image assessment (p<0.001). The inter-observer κ value was 0.638, while the intra-observer results showed moderate (κ: 0.441) and good (κ: 0.752) reproducibility comparing the RU and axial CT assessments. Observer-A detected 47.05% non-displaced fractures, 48.93% minimally displaced (≤2 mm) fractures, and 38.77% displaced fractures on RU images (p=0.009). Observer- B detected 23.52% non-displaced fractures, 57.44% minimally displaced (≤2 mm) fractures, and 48.97% displaced fractures on RU images (p=0.045). CONCLUSION: RU software accelerates fracture evaluation, while it has drawbacks including low sensitivity in fracture detection, false negativity, and underestimation of displacement.
Anahtar Kelime: “Rib Unfolding” yazılımının artıları ve eksileri: Travma hastaları üzerine güvenilirlik ve tekrarlanabilirlik çalışması
Öz: AMAÇ: Aksiyel bilgisayarlı tomografi (BT) kesitlerinde 24 kaburganın tamamının incelenmesi fazla vakit alabilmesinin yanı sıra günlük pratikte kosta kırıkları kolaylıkla gözden kaçabilir. Kostaların değerlendirmesini kolaylaştırmak amacıyla, kostaları iki boyutlu bir planda hızlı bir şekilde değerlendirilmeyi sağlayan, “Rib Unfolding” (RU) isimli bilgisayar destekli tanı koyma yazılımı geliştirilmiştir. RU yazılımını kırık tespiti için kullanmanın; güvenilirliğini, tekrarlanabilirliğini ve hızlandırıcı etkisini değerlendirmenin yanı sıra ve uygulamanın neden olabileceği sorunları belirlemeyi amaçladık. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Çalışmada gözlemci olarak görev almayacak olan araştırmacılar tarfından, göğüs travması olan 51 hastalık örneklem oluşturuldu ve örneklem içerisinde kırıkların karakterizasyonu ve dağılımı kaydedildi. Bu hastaların BT görüntüleri örneklemi oluşturan radyologlar arasında yer almayan, 5 yıllık (Gözlemci-A) ve 18 yıllık (Gözlemci-B) toraks radyolojisi deneyimleri olan, iki radyolog tarafından kırıkların varlığı, varsa tipi (nondeplase/ deplase/ minimal deplase) ve değerlendirme süreleri açısından değerlendirildi. BULGULAR: 22 hastada toplam 113 kırık saptandı. Aksiyel BT görüntüleri için ortalama değerlendirme süresi, gözlemci-A için 146,64 saniye ve gözlemci-B için 119,29 saniye idi. RU görüntüleri için ortalama değerlendirme süresi, gözlemci-A için 66,44 saniye ve gözlemci-B için 32,66 saniye idi. RU yazılımı desteği ile gözlemci-A ve gözlemci-B’nin değerlendirme periyotları arasında; aksiyal CT görüntü değerlendirmesine göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı azalma gözlendi (p<0.001). Gözlemciler arası κ değeri 0,638 iken, gözlemci içi sonuçlar RU ve aksiyel BT değerlendirmelerini karşılaştırırken orta (κ: 0,441) ve iyi (κ: 0,752) tekrarlanabilirlik gösterdi. Gözlemci-A, RU görüntülerinde %47.05 nondeplase kırık, %48.93 minimal deplase (≤2 mm) kırık ve %38.77 deplase kırık saptadı (p=0.009). Gözlemci-B, RU görüntülerinde %23.52 nondeplase kırık, %57.44 minimal deplase (≤2 mm) kırık ve %48.97 deplase kırık saptadı (p=0.045). TARTIŞMA: RU yazılımı kırık tespitini oldukça hızlandırmakla beraber, düşük sensitivite, yalancı negatiflik ve kırığın deplasman derecesinin düşük gösterilmesi gibi dezavantajlar göstermektedir.
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- 1. Henry TS, Donnelly EF, Boiselle PM, Crabtree TD, Iannettoni MD, Expert Panel on Thoracic Imaging, et al. ACR appropriateness Criteria® rib fractures. J Am Coll Radiol 2019;16:S227–34.
- 2. Pressley CM, Fry WR, Philp AS, Berry SD, Smith RS. Predicting outcome of patients with chest wall injury. Am J Surg 2012;204:910–3; discussion 913–4.
- 3. May L, Hillermann C, Patil S. Rib fracture management. BJA Educ 2016;16:26–32.
- 4. Livingston DH, Shogan B, John P, Lavery RF. CT diagnosis of rib fractures and the prediction of acute respiratory failure. J Trauma 2008;64:905–11.
- 5. Zhang B, Jia C, Wu R, Lv B, Li B, Li F, et al. Improving rib fracture detection accuracy and reading efficiency with deep learning-based detection software: A clinical evaluation. Br J Radiol 2021;94:20200870.
- 6. Bauman ZM, Grams B, Yanala U, Shostrom V, Waibel B, Evans CH, et al. Rib fracture displacement worsens over time. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 2020;47:1965–70.
- 7. El-Zehiry NY, Wimmer A. Data Driven Editing of RIB Centerlines. In: 2014 IEEE 11th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI). United States: IEEE; 2014.
- 8. Ramakrishnan S, Alvino C, Grady L, Kiraly A. Automatic three-dimensional rib centerline extraction from CT scans for enhanced visualization and anatomical context. In: Medical Imaging 2011: Image Processing. Washington USA: International Society for Optics and Photonics; 2011.
- 9. Glemser PA, Pfleiderer M, Heger A, Tremper J, Krauskopf A, Schlemmer HP, et al. New bone post-processing tools in forensic imaging: A multi-reader feasibility study to evaluate detection time and diagnostic accuracy in rib fracture assessment. Int J Legal Med 2017;131:489–96.
- 10. Homann G, Weisel K, Mustafa DF, Ditt H, Nikolaou K, Horger M. Improvement of diagnostic confidence for detection of multiple myeloma involvement of the ribs by a new CT software generating rib unfolded images: Comparison with 5-and 1-mm axial images. Skeletal Radiol 2015;44:971–9.
- 11. Ekert K, Kloth C, Fritz J, Ioanoviciu SD, Horger M. Improved detection of benign and malignant rib lesions in the routine computed tomography workup of oncological patients using automated unfolded rib image postprocessing. Invest Radiol 2020;55:84–90.
- 12. Homann G, Mustafa DF, Ditt H, Spengler W, Kopp HG, Nikolaou K, et al. Improved detection of bone metastases from lung cancer in the thoracic cage using 5-and 1-mm axial images versus a new CT software generating rib unfolding images: Comparison with standard 18F-FDGPET/ CT. Acad Radiol 2015;22:505–12.
- 13. Urbaneja A, De Verbizier J, Formery AS, Tobon-Gomez C, Nace L, Blum A, et al. Automatic rib cage unfolding with CT cylindrical projection reformat in polytraumatized patients for rib fracture detection and characterization: Feasibility and clinical application. Eur J Radiol 2019;110:121–7.
- 14. Dankerl P, Seuss H, Ellmann S, Cavallaro A, Uder M, Hammon M. Evaluation of rib fractures on a single-in-plane image reformation of the rib cage in CT examinations. Acad Radiol 2017;4:153–9.
- 15. Khung S, Masset P, Duhamel A, Faivre JB, Flohr T, Remy J, et al. Automated 3D rendering of ribs in 110 polytrauma patients: Strengths and limitations. Acad Radiol 2017;24:146–52.
- 16. Ringl H, Lazar M, Töpker M, Woitek R, Prosch H, Asenbaum U, et al. The ribs unfolded-a CT visualization algorithm for fast detection of rib fractures: Effect on sensitivity and specificity in trauma patients. Eur Radiol 2015;25:1865–74.
- 17. Bier G, Schabel C, Othman A, Bongers MN, Schmehl J, Ditt H, et al. Enhanced reading time efficiency by use of automatically unfolded CT rib reformations in acute trauma. Eur J Radiol 2015;84:2173–80.
| APA | ERDEMİR A, ONUR M, İDİLMAN İ, ERBİL B, AKPINAR E (2023). Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. , 717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| Chicago | ERDEMİR Ahmet Gürkan,ONUR Mehmet Ruhi,İDİLMAN İlkay Sedakat,ERBİL Bülent,AKPINAR Erhan Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. (2023): 717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| MLA | ERDEMİR Ahmet Gürkan,ONUR Mehmet Ruhi,İDİLMAN İlkay Sedakat,ERBİL Bülent,AKPINAR Erhan Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. , 2023, ss.717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| AMA | ERDEMİR A,ONUR M,İDİLMAN İ,ERBİL B,AKPINAR E Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. . 2023; 717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| Vancouver | ERDEMİR A,ONUR M,İDİLMAN İ,ERBİL B,AKPINAR E Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. . 2023; 717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| IEEE | ERDEMİR A,ONUR M,İDİLMAN İ,ERBİL B,AKPINAR E "Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients." , ss.717 - 723, 2023. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| ISNAD | ERDEMİR, Ahmet Gürkan vd. "Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients". (2023), 717-723. https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| APA | ERDEMİR A, ONUR M, İDİLMAN İ, ERBİL B, AKPINAR E (2023). Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, 29(6), 717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| Chicago | ERDEMİR Ahmet Gürkan,ONUR Mehmet Ruhi,İDİLMAN İlkay Sedakat,ERBİL Bülent,AKPINAR Erhan Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi 29, no.6 (2023): 717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| MLA | ERDEMİR Ahmet Gürkan,ONUR Mehmet Ruhi,İDİLMAN İlkay Sedakat,ERBİL Bülent,AKPINAR Erhan Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, vol.29, no.6, 2023, ss.717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| AMA | ERDEMİR A,ONUR M,İDİLMAN İ,ERBİL B,AKPINAR E Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi. 2023; 29(6): 717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| Vancouver | ERDEMİR A,ONUR M,İDİLMAN İ,ERBİL B,AKPINAR E Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi. 2023; 29(6): 717 - 723. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| IEEE | ERDEMİR A,ONUR M,İDİLMAN İ,ERBİL B,AKPINAR E "Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients." Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, 29, ss.717 - 723, 2023. 10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
| ISNAD | ERDEMİR, Ahmet Gürkan vd. "Pros and cons of rib unfolding software: a reliability and reproducibility study on trauma patients". Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi 29/6 (2023), 717-723. https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2023.64359 |
