Validation of a Semiautomatic Image Analysis Software for the Quantification of Musculoskeletal Tissues

Autor: Jane A. Cauley, Ebrahim Bani Hassan, Mahdi Imani, Aaron Samuel Tze Nor Ch'Ng, Sara Vogrin, Gustavo Duque, Nancy E Lane
Rok vydání: 2021
Předmět:
Zdroj: Calcified tissue international, vol 110, iss 3
Calcif Tissue Int
ISSN: 1432-0827
0171-967X
DOI: 10.1007/s00223-021-00914-4
Popis: Background: Accurate quantification of bone, muscle, and their components is still an unmet need in the musculoskeletal field. Current methods to quantify tissue volumes in 3D images are expensive, labor-intensive, and time-consuming; thus, a reliable, valid, and quick application is highly needed.Methods: Tissue Compass is a standalone software for semiautomatic segmentation and automatic quantification of musculoskeletal organs. To validate the software, cross-sectional micro-CT scans images of rat femur (n=19), and CT images of hip and abdomen (n=100) from the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study were used to quantify bone, hematopoietic marrow (HBM), and marrow adipose tissue (MAT) using commercial manual software as a comparator. Also, abdominal CT scans (n=100) were used to quantify psoas muscle volumes and intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT) using the same software. We calculated Pearson's correlation coefficients, individual intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), and Bland-Altman limits of agreement together with Bland-Altman plots to show the inter- and intra-observer agreement between Tissue Compass and commercially available software.Results: In the animal study, the agreement between Tissue Compass and commercial software was r>0.93 and ICC>0.93 for rat femur measurements. Bland-Altman limits of agreement was -720.89 (-1.5e+04, 13074.00) for MAT, 4421.11 (-1.8e+04, 27149.73) for HBM and -6073.32 (-2.9e+04, 16388.37) for bone. The inter-observer agreement for QCT human study between two observers was r>0.99 and ICC>0.99. Bland-Altman limits of agreement was 0.01 (-0.07, 0.10) for MAT in hip, 0.02 (-0.08, 0.12) for HBM in hip, 0.05 (-0.15, 0.25) for bone in hip, 0.02 (-0.18, 0.22) for MAT in L1, 0.00 (-0.16, 0.16) for HBM in L1, 0.02 (-0.23, 0.27) for bone in L1. The intra-observer agreement for QCT human study between two applications was r>0.997 and ICC>0.99. Bland-Altman limits of agreement was 0.03 (-0.13, 0.20) for MAT in hip, 0.05 (-0.08, 0.18) for HBM in hip, 0.05 (-0.24, 0.34) for bone in hip, -0.02 (-0.34, 0.31) for MAT in L1, -0.14 (-0.44, 0.17) for HBM in L1, -0.29 (-0.62, 0.05) for bone in L1, 0.03 (-0.08, 0.15) for IMAT in psoas, and 0.02 (-0.35, 0.38) for muscle in psoas. Conclusion: Compared to a conventional application, Tissue Compass demonstrated high accuracy and non-inferiority while also facilitating easier analyses. Tissue Compass could become the tool of choice to diagnose tissue loss/gain syndromes in the future by requiring a small number of CT sections to detect tissue volumes and fat infiltration.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: