Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Lung Infection Quantification of COVID-19 in CT Images with Deep Learning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2003.04655 v3 pith:KUKCUGXY submitted 2020-03-10 cs.CV eess.IVq-bio.QM

classification cs.CVeess.IVq-bio.QM
keywords infectioncovid-19lungmanualscanssegmentationautomaticautomatically
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

CT imaging is crucial for diagnosis, assessment and staging COVID-19 infection. Follow-up scans every 3-5 days are often recommended for disease progression. It has been reported that bilateral and peripheral ground glass opacification (GGO) with or without consolidation are predominant CT findings in COVID-19 patients. However, due to lack of computerized quantification tools, only qualitative impression and rough description of infected areas are currently used in radiological reports. In this paper, a deep learning (DL)-based segmentation system is developed to automatically quantify infection regions of interest (ROIs) and their volumetric ratios w.r.t. the lung. The performance of the system was evaluated by comparing the automatically segmented infection regions with the manually-delineated ones on 300 chest CT scans of 300 COVID-19 patients. For fast manual delineation of training samples and possible manual intervention of automatic results, a human-in-the-loop (HITL) strategy has been adopted to assist radiologists for infection region segmentation, which dramatically reduced the total segmentation time to 4 minutes after 3 iterations of model updating. The average Dice simiarility coefficient showed 91.6% agreement between automatic and manual infaction segmentations, and the mean estimation error of percentage of infection (POI) was 0.3% for the whole lung. Finally, possible applications, including but not limited to analysis of follow-up CT scans and infection distributions in the lobes and segments correlated with clinical findings, were discussed.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools