Deep Learning Prostate MRI Segmentation Accuracy and Robustness: A Systematic Review.

Abstract

"Just Accepted" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in Radiology: Artificial Intelligence. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content. Purpose To investigate the accuracy and robustness of prostate segmentation using deep learning across various training data sizes, MRI vendors, prostate zones, and testing methods relative to fellowship-trained diagnostic radiologists. Materials and methods In this systematic review, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were queried for English-language articles using keywords and related terms for prostate MRI segmentation and deep learning algorithms dated to July 31, 2022. A total of 691 articles from the search query were collected, and subsequently filtered to 48 based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Multiple characteristics were extracted from selected studies, such as deep learning algorithm performance, MRI vendor, and training dataset features. The primary outcome was comparison of mean Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for prostate segmentation for deep learning algorithms versus diagnostic radiologists. Results Forty-eight studies were included. The vast majority of published deep learning algorithms for whole prostate gland segmentation (39/42 or 93%) had a DSC at or above expert level (DSC ≥ 0.86). The mean DSC was 0.79 ± 0.06 for peripheral zone, 0.87 ± 0.05 for transition zone, and 0.90 ± 0.04 for whole prostate gland segmentation. For selected studies using one major MRI vendor, the mean DSCs of each were as follows: GE (3/48 studies) 0.92 ± 0.03, Philips (4/48 studies) 0.92 ± 0.02, and Siemens (6/48 studies) 0.91 ± 0.03. Conclusion Deep learning algorithms for prostate MRI segmentation demonstrated comparable accuracy to expert radiologists despite varying parameters, therefore future research should shift toward evaluating segmentation robustness and patient outcomes across diverse clinical settings. ©RSNA, 2024.