Automating Perforator Flap MRA and CTA Reporting
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.
KeywordsBreast reconstruction Magnetic resonance angiography Computed tomographic angiography Perforator Autologous flap Automated reporting
- 7.Thimmappa, N, Pei, M, Wang, Y, Chen, C, Ahn, C et al., Semi-automated perforator flap reporting. Radiological Society of North America 2012 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Chicago IL. http://archive.rsna.org/2012/12023099.html Accessed November 10, 2016.