TABLE III.
Summary of quantitative evaluation of the various methods in segmenting the LV infarct, using 3D geometry-based metrics. Significant differences betweeen the DSC and δV of CMF and those of other methods are indicated by asterisks.
| Method | DSC (%) | δV (%) | δVsgn (%) | RMSE (mm) | δSA (%) | Euler δχ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMF | 76.4±6.3 | 18.17±11.3 | −8.5±20.4 | 2.22±2.55 | 17.1±11.8 | 6.2±4.8 |
| CMF3D | 72.7±11.3 | 22.31±18.4 | 2.5±43.7 | 3.76±3.10 | 25.6±29.3 | 8.3±10.5 |
| FWHM | *62.6±12.1 | *45.1±25.3 | −31.6±41.1 | 3.10±2.96 | 33.3±24.8 | 13.3±11.8 |
| STRM1 | *67.1±9.75 | *55.5±46.7 | 50.8±51.8 | 6.65±3.89 | 31.6±28.9 | 20.7±19.0 |
| STRM2 | *69.6±11.5 | *30.8±26.3 | 14.5±38.06 | 5.21±3.44 | 33.1±27.3 | 15.7±13.6 |
| STRM3 | *68.9±15.1 | *25.3±21.5 | −8.8±32.2 | 4.09±3.03 | 36.5±29.7 | 16.1±13.1 |
| RG | *45.8±15.4 | *69.6±49.1 | −37.7±76.8 | 6.22±3.58 | 51.3±23.9 | 7.2±6.1 |