Back

Automated Segmentation of Cerebral Arteries on Three-Dimensional Rotational Angiography Using nnUNet v2: Prospective Validation with Quantitative Metrics and Expert Qualitative Assessment

Hofmeister, J.; Brina, O.; Rosi, A.; Bernava, G.; Reymond, P.; Muster, M.; Lovblad, K.-O.; Machi, P.

2026-05-26 radiology and imaging
10.64898/2026.05.20.26353640 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Three-dimensional visualization and quantitative analysis of cerebral arteries on 3DRA are central to endovascular treatment planning, device selection, and cerebrovascular research. Manual segmentation is time-consuming and operator-dependent, yet no open-source deep learning model has been prospectively validated for this task on 3DRA. Methods: A nnUNet v2 model was trained for binary cerebral artery segmentation on 400 consecutive 3DRA acquisitions from three angiographic systems, comparing four configurations across architectures and loss functions. The best-performing configurations were prospectively validated on 40 patients using a dual approach: quantitative metrics (DSC, clDice, HD95, ASD, Precision, Recall), and blinded expert qualitative evaluation by two interventional neuroradiologists assessing 12 arterial segments, a global quality score, and clinical usability across 40 test cases. Results: The ensemble model achieved median DSC 0.917, clDice 0.932, and HD95 1.494 mm. Global quality scores were significantly lower for nnUNet v2 than for expert segmentations (median 4 vs 5, p<0.001), but nnUNet v2 segmentations were rated clinically usable in 88-90% of cases versus 95-98% for expert segmentations, without significant difference on the binary usability criterion. A consistent proximal-to-distal quality gradient was identified, with comparable scores at proximal arteries and the largest differences at distal arterial segments. Conclusion: nnUNet v2 with topology-aware training provides clinically usable cerebral artery segmentations on 3DRA, prospectively validated through both quantitative metrics and structured expert qualitative assessment, and represents a reproducible open-source foundation for endovascular and research applications.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.