Skip to main content

Table 4 Difference in volume and AD/BED metrics at the lesion level when comparing the two segmentation methods and the two realizations of PET-based segmentation

From: Impact of 90Y PET gradient-based tumor segmentation on voxel-level dosimetry in liver radioembolization

  PS vs MS PS1 vs PS2
ΔVolume (cm3) 0.8 ± 51 [− 336, − 2, 3, 12, 69] 5 ± 40 [− 78, − 1, 0,4256]
Absorbed Dose
 ΔMean (Gy) 30 ± 50 [− 96, 1, 17, 45, 222] − 6 ± 23 [− 103, − 13, − 0,3,37]
 ΔD70 (Gy) 38 ± 61 [− 115, 1, 18, 57, 240] − 7 ± 23 [− 85, − 10, − 0,4,40]
 ΔD90(Gy) 44 ± 68 [−129, 3, 24, 70, 250] −6 ± 23 [− 84, − 7, 0,3,51]
BED
 ΔMean (Gy) 63 ± 142 [− 273, 2, 30, 80, 745] − 14.7 + −  55 [− 266, − 22, − 1, 7, 67]
 ΔBED70(Gy) 76 ± 155 [− 308, 2, 29, 113, 733] − 13.8 + − 49 [− 197, − 16, − 1, 6, 75]
 ΔBED90 (Gy) 79 ± 152 [− 309, 3, 30, 107, 677] − 11.6 + −  42 [− 170, − 17, 0, 5, 78]
ΔVolume (%) 44 ± 100 [− 85, − 27, 18, 99, 382] 54 ± 253 [− 75, − 10, 1, 25, 1779]
Absorbed Dose
 ΔMean (%) 24 ± 36 [− 43, 2, 14, 36, 193] − 2.5 ± 11 [− 39, − 7, − 0, 2, 21]
 ΔD70 (%) 49 ± 72 [− 51, 2, 24, 75, 318] − 1.9 ± 16 [− 48, − 9, − 0, 4, 39]
 ΔD90(%) 93 ± 150 [− 58, 8, 46, 125, 832] − 0.9 ± 21 [− 52, − 10, 0, 4, 72]
BED
 ΔMean (%) 28 ± 42 [− 46, 2, 17, 46, 221] − 3.0 + − 13 [− 45, − 8, − 0,3,25]
 ΔBED70(%) 62 ± 85 [− 53, 2, 31, 105, 345] − 2.3 + − 18 [− 54, − 12, − 0,5,42]
 ΔBED90(%) 117 ± 183 [− 60, 10, 54, 174, 1026] − 1.2 + − 24 [− 59, − 13, 0,4,89]
  1. The results are listed as mean ± stdev [min, 1st quartile, median, 3rd quartile, max]. The top half of the table represents absolute differences and the bottom half represents relative differences