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 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
33.8%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 2%
14.7%
3
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.3%
50% of probability mass above
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 30%
5.0%
5
Photoacoustics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
6
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.8%
7
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.7%
8
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
9
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
10
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
11
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
12
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
13
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
14
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
15
Open Heart
19 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
16
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
38 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
17
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
18
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
19
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
20
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
21
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
22
Stroke
35 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
23
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
24
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
43 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%