Rashed Karim

Knowledge of left atrial (LA) anatomy is important for atrial fibrillation ablation guidance, fibrosis quantification and biophysical modelling. Segmentation of the LA from Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Computed Tomography (CT) images is a complex problem. This manuscript presents a benchmark to evaluate algorithms that address LA segmentation. The datasets, ground truth and evaluation code have been made publicly available through the http://www.cardiacatlas.org website. This manuscript also reports the results of the Left Atrial Segmentation Challenge (LASC) carried out at the STACOM'13 workshop, in conjunction with MICCAI'13. Thirty CT and 30 MRI datasets were provided to participants for segmentation. Each participant segmented the LA including a short part of the LA appendage trunk and proximal sections of the pulmonary veins (PVs). We present results for nine algorithms for CT and eight algorithms for MRI. Results showed that methodologies combining statistical models with region growing approaches were the most appropriate to handle the proposed task. The ground truth and automatic segmentations were standardised to reduce the influence of inconsistently defined regions (e.g., mitral plane, PVs end points, LA appendage). This standardisation framework, which is a contribution of this work, can be used to label and further analyse anatomical regions of the LA. By performing the standardisation directly on the left atrial surface, we can process multiple input data, including meshes exported from different electroanatomical mapping systems.

BACKGROUND: Late Gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging can be used to visualise regions of fibrosis and scarring in the left atrium (LA) myocardium. This can be important for treatment stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and for assessment of treatment after radio frequency catheter ablation (RFCA). In this paper we present a standardised evaluation benchmarking framework for algorithms segmenting fibrosis and scar from LGE CMR images. The algorithms reported are the response to an open challenge that was put to the medical imaging community through an ISBI (IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging) workshop. METHODS: The image database consisted of 60 multicenter, multivendor LGE CMR image datasets from patients with AF, with 30 images taken before and 30 after RFCA for the treatment of AF. A reference standard for scar and fibrosis was established by merging manual segmentations from three observers. Furthermore, scar was also quantified using 2, 3 and 4 standard deviations (SD) and full-width-at-half-maximum (FWHM) methods. Seven institutions responded to the challenge: Imperial College (IC), Mevis Fraunhofer (MV), Sunnybrook Health Sciences (SY), Harvard/Boston University (HB), Yale School of Medicine (YL), King's College London (KCL) and Utah CARMA (UTA, UTB). There were 8 different algorithms evaluated in this study. RESULTS: Some algorithms were able to perform significantly better than SD and FWHM methods in both pre- and post-ablation imaging. Segmentation in pre-ablation images was challenging and good correlation with the reference standard was found in post-ablation images. Overlap scores (out of 100) with the reference standard were as follows: Pre: IC = 37, MV = 22, SY = 17, YL = 48, KCL = 30, UTA = 42, UTB = 45; Post: IC = 76, MV = 85, SY = 73, HB = 76, YL = 84, KCL = 78, UTA = 78, UTB = 72. CONCLUSIONS: The study concludes that currently no algorithm is deemed clearly better than others. There is scope for further algorithmic developments in LA fibrosis and scar quantification from LGE CMR images. Benchmarking of future scar segmentation algorithms is thus important. The proposed benchmarking framework is made available as open-source and new participants can evaluate their algorithms via a web-based interface.