Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Digital Imaging 3/2017

01-06-2017

Automating Perforator Flap MRA and CTA Reporting

Authors: Christopher J. Lange, Nanda Deepa Thimmappa, Srikanth R. Boddu, Silvina P. Dutruel, Mengchao Pei, Zerwa Farooq, Ashkan Heshmatzadeh Behzadi, Yi Wang, Ramin Zabih, Martin R. Prince

Published in: Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine | Issue 3/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Surgical breast reconstruction after mastectomy requires precise perforator coordinates/dimensions, perforator course, and fat volume in a radiology report. Automatic perforator reporting software was implemented as an OsiriX Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) viewer plugin. For perforator analysis, the user identifies a reference point (e.g., umbilicus) and marks each perforating artery/vein bundle with multiple region of interest (ROI) points along its course beginning at the muscle–fat interface. Computations using these points and analysis of image data produce content for the report. Post-processing times were compared against conventional/manual methods using de-identified images of 26 patients with surgically confirmed accuracy of perforator locations and caliber. The time from loading source images to completion of report was measured. Significance of differences in mean processing times for this automated approach versus the conventional/manual approach was assessed using a paired t test. The mean conventional reporting time for our radiologists was 76 ± 27 min (median 65 min) compared with 25 ± 6 min (median 25 min) using our OsiriX plugin (p < 0.01). The conventional approach had three reports with transcription errors compared to none with the OsiriX plugin. Otherwise, the reports were similar. In conclusion, automated reporting of perforator magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) studies is faster compared with the standard, manual approach, and transcription errors which are eliminated.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Minqiang X, Lanhua M, Jie L, Dali M, Jinguo L. The value of multidetector-row CT angiography for pre-operative planning of breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric arterial perforator flaps. Br J Radiol. 2010;83(985):40–3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Minqiang X, Lanhua M, Jie L, Dali M, Jinguo L. The value of multidetector-row CT angiography for pre-operative planning of breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric arterial perforator flaps. Br J Radiol. 2010;83(985):40–3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Rozen WM, Ashton MW. Modifying techniques in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap harvest with the use of pre-operative imaging. ANZ J Surg. 2009;79 (9):598–603CrossRefPubMed Rozen WM, Ashton MW. Modifying techniques in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap harvest with the use of pre-operative imaging. ANZ J Surg. 2009;79 (9):598–603CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Zou Z, Kate Lee H, Levine JL, Greenspun DT, Allen RJ et al. Gadofosveset trisodium-enhanced abdominal perforator MRA. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35 (3):711–6.CrossRefPubMed Zou Z, Kate Lee H, Levine JL, Greenspun DT, Allen RJ et al. Gadofosveset trisodium-enhanced abdominal perforator MRA. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35 (3):711–6.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Masia J, Clavero JA, Larrañaga JR, Alomar X, Pons G, Serret P. Multidetector-row computed tomography in the planning of abdominal perforator flaps. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59:594–9.CrossRefPubMed Masia J, Clavero JA, Larrañaga JR, Alomar X, Pons G, Serret P. Multidetector-row computed tomography in the planning of abdominal perforator flaps. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59:594–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Agrawal MD, Thimmappa ND, Vasile JV, Levine JL, Allen RJ et al. Autologous breast reconstruction: pre-operative magnetic resonance angiography for perforator flap vessel mapping. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2015; 31(1):1–11PubMed Agrawal MD, Thimmappa ND, Vasile JV, Levine JL, Allen RJ et al. Autologous breast reconstruction: pre-operative magnetic resonance angiography for perforator flap vessel mapping. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2015; 31(1):1–11PubMed
6.
go back to reference Eylert G, Deutinger M, Stemberger A, Huber W, Gösseringer N. Evaluation of the perforator CT-angiography with a cancer risk assessment in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(4):e80–2.CrossRefPubMed Eylert G, Deutinger M, Stemberger A, Huber W, Gösseringer N. Evaluation of the perforator CT-angiography with a cancer risk assessment in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(4):e80–2.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Chae MP, Hunter-Smith DJ, Rozen WM. Comparative study of software techniques for 3D mapping of perforators in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap planning. Gland Surg. 2016;5(2):99–106PubMedPubMedCentral Chae MP, Hunter-Smith DJ, Rozen WM. Comparative study of software techniques for 3D mapping of perforators in deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap planning. Gland Surg. 2016;5(2):99–106PubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Eder M, Raith S, Jalali J, Müller D, Harder Y, et al. Three-dimensional prediction of free-flap volume in autologous breast reconstruction by CT angiography imaging. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2014;9(4):541–9CrossRefPubMed Eder M, Raith S, Jalali J, Müller D, Harder Y, et al. Three-dimensional prediction of free-flap volume in autologous breast reconstruction by CT angiography imaging. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2014;9(4):541–9CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Hummelink S, Hameeteman M, Hoogeveen Y, Slump CH, Ulrich DJ, Schultze Kool LJ. Preliminary results using a newly developed projection method to visualize vascular anatomy prior to DIEP flap breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(3):390–4.CrossRefPubMed Hummelink S, Hameeteman M, Hoogeveen Y, Slump CH, Ulrich DJ, Schultze Kool LJ. Preliminary results using a newly developed projection method to visualize vascular anatomy prior to DIEP flap breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(3):390–4.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Zöllner FG, Daab M, Sourbron SP, Schad LR, Schoenberg SO, Weisser G. An open source software for analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance images: UMMPerfusion revisited. BMC Med Imaging. 2016;16:7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Zöllner FG, Daab M, Sourbron SP, Schad LR, Schoenberg SO, Weisser G. An open source software for analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance images: UMMPerfusion revisited. BMC Med Imaging. 2016;16:7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Blackledge MD, Collins DJ, Koh DM, Leach MO. Rapid development of image analysis research tools: bridging the gap between researcher and clinician with pyOsiriX. Comput Biol Med. 2016; 69: 203–12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Blackledge MD, Collins DJ, Koh DM, Leach MO. Rapid development of image analysis research tools: bridging the gap between researcher and clinician with pyOsiriX. Comput Biol Med. 2016; 69: 203–12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Lo Presti G, Carbone M, Ciriaci D, Aramini D, Ferrari M, Ferrari V. Assessment of DICOM viewers capable of loading patient-specific 3D models obtained by different segmentation platforms in the operating room. J Digit Imaging. 2015; 28(5):518–27.CrossRefPubMed Lo Presti G, Carbone M, Ciriaci D, Aramini D, Ferrari M, Ferrari V. Assessment of DICOM viewers capable of loading patient-specific 3D models obtained by different segmentation platforms in the operating room. J Digit Imaging. 2015; 28(5):518–27.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Automating Perforator Flap MRA and CTA Reporting
Authors
Christopher J. Lange
Nanda Deepa Thimmappa
Srikanth R. Boddu
Silvina P. Dutruel
Mengchao Pei
Zerwa Farooq
Ashkan Heshmatzadeh Behzadi
Yi Wang
Ramin Zabih
Martin R. Prince
Publication date
01-06-2017
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 2948-2925
Electronic ISSN: 2948-2933
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-017-9943-z

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

Journal of Digital Imaging 3/2017 Go to the issue