. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jul 21.

Published in final edited form as: Med Phys. 2019 Oct 31;46(12):5637–5651. doi: 10.1002/mp.13853

Table III.

Comparison of the segmentation results obtained from the DMR-UNet model against the top three ACDC challenge participants, evaluated on the held-out 50 patient challenge test set.

	End diastole (ED)							End systole (ES)							EF
	LV		RV		Myo			LV		RV		Myo			LV Corr	RV Corr
	Dice	HD	Dice	HD	Dice	HD	Corr	Dice	HD	Dice	HD	Dice	HD	Corr	LV Corr	RV Corr

Baumgartner⁴⁴	0.96	6.53	0.93	12.67	0.89	8.70	0.982	0.91	9.17	0.88	14.69	0.90	10.64	0.983	0.988	0.851
Khened⁴⁶	0.96	8.13	0.94	13.99	0.89	9.84	0.990	0.92	8.97	0.88	13.93	0.90	12.58	0.979	0.989	0.858
Isensee⁴⁶	0.97	7.38	0.95	10.12	0.90	8.72	0.989	0.93	6.91	0.90	12.14	0.92	8.67	0.985	0.991	0.901
DMR-UNet	0.96	6.05	0.94	9.52	0.89	7.92	0.989	0.92	8.16	0.88	13.05	0.91	8.39	0.987	0.989	0.851

The Dice metric, Hausdorff Distance (HD), and correlation of clinical indices for all three heart chambers is shown.

Best performing model for the ED and ES phases are shown in bold case.