The use of an active appearance model for automated prostate segmentation in magnetic resonance

Figures & data

Table I. Results from the comparison of the automated segmentation and the manual reference delineation.

Similarity measure	Mean ± std	Median ± std	Range
DSC	0.84 ± 0.07	0.86 ± 0.07	0.59 – 0.94
Sensitivity	0.99 ± 0.02	0.99 ± 0.02	0.88 – 1.00
Specificity	0.93 ± 0.08	0.96 ± 0.08	0.67 – 1.00
Mean surface distance [mm]	1.39 ± 1.00	1.12 ± 1.00	0.43 – 5.38
Largest distance [mm]	7.01 ± 2.31	6.62 ± 2.31	3.59 – 11.59

Figure 1. Examples of the prostate segmentation in the axial plane (left) and the sagittal plane (right) from three patients. Blue: Manual reference segmentation, Green: Automated segmentation, Red: Average model. The DSC for the three segmentations was 0.94 (top), 0.79 (middle), 0.89 (bottom).

Figure 2. Examples of the prostate segmentation. Left: The reference manual segmentation. Right: Automated 3D segmentation.