Cited by 175Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationMedical Imaging and Analysis

User-Guided Segmentation of Multi-modality Medical Imaging Datasets with ITK-SNAP

Open access
Yushkevich, Paul A., Pashchinskiy, Artem, Oguz, Ipek, Mohan, Suyash, Schmitt, J. Eric, Stein, Joel M., Zukić, Dženan, Vicory, Jared +5 more·2019·Neuroinformatics

Abstract

ITK-SNAP is an interactive software tool for manual and semi-automatic segmentation of 3D medical images. This paper summarizes major new features added to ITK-SNAP over the last decade. The main focus of the paper is on new features that support semi-automatic segmentation of multi-modality imaging datasets, such as MRI scans acquired using different contrast mechanisms (e.g., T1, T2, FLAIR). The new functionality uses decision forest classifiers trained interactively by the user to transform multiple input image volumes into a foreground/background probability map; this map is then input as the data term to the active contour evolution algorithm, which yields regularized surface representations of the segmented objects of interest. The new functionality is evaluated in the context of high-grade and low-grade glioma segmentation by three expert neuroradiogists and a non-expert on a reference dataset from the MICCAI 2013 Multi-Modal Brain Tumor Segmentation Challenge (BRATS). The accuracy of semi-automatic segmentation is competitive with the top specialized brain tumor segmentation methods evaluated in the BRATS challenge, with most results obtained in ITK-SNAP being more accurate, relative to the BRATS reference manual segmentation, than the second-best performer in the BRATS challenge; and all results being more accurate than the fourth-best performer. Segmentation time is reduced over manual segmentation by 2.5 and 5 times, depending on the rater. Additional experiments in interactive placenta segmentation in 3D fetal ultrasound illustrate the generalizability of the new functionality to a different problem domain.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12021-018-9385-x

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [26]Oguz I, Pouch AM, Yushkevich N, Wang H, Gee JC, Schwartz N, Yushkevich PA, 2016 Automated placenta segmentation from 3D ultrasound images. In: MICCAI Workshop on Perinatal, Preterm and Paediatric Image analysis (PIPPI).
  2. [36]Zhu L, Kolesov I, Gao Y, Kikinis R, Tannenbaum A, 2014 An effective interactive medical image segmentation method using fast growcut. In: MICCAI workshop on interactive medical image computing.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yushkevich, P. A., Pashchinskiy, A., Oguz, I., Mohan, S., Schmitt, J. E., Stein, J. M., Zukić, D., Vicory, J., McCormick, M., Yushkevich, N., Schwartz, N., Gao, Y., & Gerig, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Kitware (United States) (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Yushkevich, Paul A.
Venue
Neuroinformatics
Published
2018-06-27
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
83-102
ISSN
  • 1539-2791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-0089
OpenAlex
W2810700317
Cited by
175
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 6
FWCI
6.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01 EB014346, R01 EB017255)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (K01 ES026840)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U01 HD087180)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Medical Imaging and Analysis
Keywords
ITK-SNAP, semi-automatic segmentation, MRI segmentation, brain tumor segmentation, glioma segmentation, BraTS, placenta segmentation, 3D fetal ultrasound
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Brain, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Software, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Neuroimaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review