Chunliang Wang1, Orjan Smedby. 1. Department of Radiology (IMH), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. chunliang.wang@liu.se
Abstract
PURPOSE: To present newly developed software that can provide fast coronary artery segmentation and accurate centerline extraction for later lesion visualization and quantitative measurement while minimizing user interaction. METHODS: Previously reported fully automatic and interactive methods for coronary artery extraction were optimized and integrated into a user-friendly workflow. The user's waiting time is saved by running the non-supervised coronary artery segmentation and centerline tracking in the background as soon as the images are received. When the user opens the data, the software provides an intuitive interactive analysis environment. RESULTS: The average overlap between the centerline created in our software and the reference standard was 96.0%. The average distance between them was 0.38 mm. The automatic procedure runs for 1.4-2.5 min as a single-thread application in the background. Interactive processing takes 3 min in average. CONCLUSION: In preliminary experiments, the software achieved higher efficiency than the former interactive method, and reasonable accuracy compared to manual vessel extraction.
PURPOSE: To present newly developed software that can provide fast coronary artery segmentation and accurate centerline extraction for later lesion visualization and quantitative measurement while minimizing user interaction. METHODS: Previously reported fully automatic and interactive methods for coronary artery extraction were optimized and integrated into a user-friendly workflow. The user's waiting time is saved by running the non-supervised coronary artery segmentation and centerline tracking in the background as soon as the images are received. When the user opens the data, the software provides an intuitive interactive analysis environment. RESULTS: The average overlap between the centerline created in our software and the reference standard was 96.0%. The average distance between them was 0.38 mm. The automatic procedure runs for 1.4-2.5 min as a single-thread application in the background. Interactive processing takes 3 min in average. CONCLUSION: In preliminary experiments, the software achieved higher efficiency than the former interactive method, and reasonable accuracy compared to manual vessel extraction.
Authors: Henk A Marquering; Jouke Dijkstra; Patrick J H de Koning; Berend C Stoel; Johan H C Reiber Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Elliot K Fishman; Derek R Ney; David G Heath; Frank M Corl; Karen M Horton; Pamela T Johnson Journal: Radiographics Date: 2006 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Matthew J Budoff; Stephan Achenbach; Roger S Blumenthal; J Jeffrey Carr; Jonathan G Goldin; Philip Greenland; Alan D Guerci; Joao A C Lima; Daniel J Rader; Geoffrey D Rubin; Leslee J Shaw; Susan E Wiegers Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-10-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jawdat Abdulla; Steen Z Abildstrom; Ole Gotzsche; Erik Christensen; Lars Kober; Christian Torp-Pedersen Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2007-11-02 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Michiel Schaap; Coert T Metz; Theo van Walsum; Alina G van der Giessen; Annick C Weustink; Nico R Mollet; Christian Bauer; Hrvoje Bogunović; Carlos Castro; Xiang Deng; Engin Dikici; Thomas O'Donnell; Michel Frenay; Ola Friman; Marcela Hernández Hoyos; Pieter H Kitslaar; Karl Krissian; Caroline Kühnel; Miguel A Luengo-Oroz; Maciej Orkisz; Orjan Smedby; Martin Styner; Andrzej Szymczak; Hüseyin Tek; Chunliang Wang; Simon K Warfield; Sebastian Zambal; Yong Zhang; Gabriel P Krestin; Wiro J Niessen Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2009-06-30 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Jolanda Sabatino; Salvatore De Rosa; Isabella Leo; Carmen Spaccarotella; Annalisa Mongiardo; Alberto Polimeni; Sabato Sorrentino; Giovanni Di Salvo; Ciro Indolfi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-12-28 Impact factor: 3.240