% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Bhandary:276108,
author = {S. Bhandary and D. Kuhn$^*$ and Z. Babaiee and T.
Fechter$^*$ and M. Benndorf and C. Zamboglou$^*$ and A.-L.
Grosu$^*$ and R. Grosu},
title = {{I}nvestigation and benchmarking of {U}-{N}ets on prostate
segmentation tasks.},
journal = {Computerized medical imaging and graphics},
volume = {107},
issn = {0895-6111},
address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier Science},
reportid = {DKFZ-2023-01008},
pages = {102241},
year = {2023},
abstract = {In healthcare, a growing number of physicians and support
staff are striving to facilitate personalized radiotherapy
regimens for patients with prostate cancer. This is because
individual patient biology is unique, and employing a single
approach for all is inefficient. A crucial step for
customizing radiotherapy planning and gaining fundamental
information about the disease, is the identification and
delineation of targeted structures. However, accurate
biomedical image segmentation is time-consuming, requires
considerable experience and is prone to observer
variability. In the past decade, the use of deep learning
models has significantly increased in the field of medical
image segmentation. At present, a vast number of anatomical
structures can be demarcated on a clinician's level with
deep learning models. These models would not only unload
work, but they can offer unbiased characterization of the
disease. The main architectures used in segmentation are the
U-Net and its variants, that exhibit outstanding
performances. However, reproducing results or directly
comparing methods is often limited by closed source of data
and the large heterogeneity among medical images. With this
in mind, our intention is to provide a reliable source for
assessing deep learning models. As an example, we chose the
challenging task of delineating the prostate gland in
multi-modal images. First, this paper provides a
comprehensive review of current state-of-the-art
convolutional neural networks for 3D prostate segmentation.
Second, utilizing public and in-house CT and MR datasets of
varying properties, we created a framework for an objective
comparison of automatic prostate segmentation algorithms.
The framework was used for rigorous evaluations of the
models, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses.},
subtyp = {Review Article},
keywords = {Automatic prostate segmentation (Other) / Comparison
framework (Other) / Medical imaging (Other) / U-net
variations (Other)},
cin = {FR01},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)FR01-20160331},
pnm = {899 - ohne Topic (POF4-899)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-899},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:37201475},
doi = {10.1016/j.compmedimag.2023.102241},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/276108},
}