Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
EClinicalMedicine ; 76: 102802, 2024 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39351025

RESUMO

Background: As differentiating between lipomas and atypical lipomatous tumors (ALTs) based on imaging is challenging and requires biopsies, radiomics has been proposed to aid the diagnosis. This study aimed to externally and prospectively validate a radiomics model differentiating between lipomas and ALTs on MRI in three large, multi-center cohorts, and extend it with automatic and minimally interactive segmentation methods to increase clinical feasibility. Methods: Three study cohorts were formed, two for external validation containing data from medical centers in the United States (US) collected from 2008 until 2018 and the United Kingdom (UK) collected from 2011 until 2017, and one for prospective validation consisting of data collected from 2020 until 2021 in the Netherlands. Patient characteristics, MDM2 amplification status, and MRI scans were collected. An automatic segmentation method was developed to segment all tumors on T1-weighted MRI scans of the validation cohorts. Segmentations were subsequently quality scored. In case of insufficient quality, an interactive segmentation method was used. Radiomics performance was evaluated for all cohorts and compared to two radiologists. Findings: The validation cohorts included 150 (54% ALT), 208 (37% ALT), and 86 patients (28% ALT) from the US, UK and NL. Of the 444 cases, 78% were automatically segmented. For 22%, interactive segmentation was necessary due to insufficient quality, with only 3% of all patients requiring manual adjustment. External validation resulted in an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.82) in US data and 0.86 (0.80, 0.92) in UK data. Prospective validation resulted in an AUC of 0.89 (0.83, 0.96). The radiomics model performed similar to the two radiologists (US: 0.79 and 0.76, UK: 0.86 and 0.86, NL: 0.82 and 0.85). Interpretation: The radiomics model extended with automatic and minimally interactive segmentation methods accurately differentiated between lipomas and ALTs in two large, multi-center external cohorts, and in prospective validation, performing similar to expert radiologists, possibly limiting the need for invasive diagnostics. Funding: Hanarth fonds.

2.
Arch Plast Surg ; 51(4): 378-385, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39034979

RESUMO

Background The best timing of closure of the hard palate in individuals with cleft lip, alveolus, and palate (CLAP) to reach the optimal speech outcomes and maxillary growth is still a subject of debate. This study evaluates changes in compensatory articulatory patterns and resonance in patients with unilateral and bilateral CLAP who underwent simultaneous closure of the hard palate and secondary alveolar bone grafting (ABG). Methods A retrospective study of patients with nonsyndromic unilateral and bilateral CLAP who underwent delayed hard palate closure (DHPC) simultaneously with ABG at 9 to 12 years of age from 2013 to 2018. The articulatory patterns, nasality, degree of hypernasality, facial grimacing, and speech intelligibility were assessed pre- and postoperatively. Results Forty-eight patients were included. DHPC and ABG were performed at the mean age of 10.5 years. Postoperatively hypernasal speech was still present in 54% of patients; however, the degree of hypernasality decreased in 67% ( p < 0.001). Grimacing decreased in 27% ( p = 0.015). Articulation disorders remained present in 85% ( p = 0.375). Intelligible speech (grade 1 or 2) was observed in 71 compared with 35% of patients preoperatively ( p < 0.001). Conclusion This study showed an improved resonance and intelligibility following DHPC at the mean age of 10.5 years, however compensatory articulation errors persisted. Sequential treatments such as speech therapy play a key role in improvement of speech and may reduce remaining compensatory mechanisms following DHPC.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA