Literature DB >> 20527563

Computerized image analysis: texture-field orientation method for pectoral muscle identification on MLO-view mammograms.

Chuan Zhou1, Jun Wei, Heang-Ping Chan, Chintana Paramagul, Lubomir M Hadjiiski, Berkman Sahiner, Julie A Douglas.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop a new texture-field orientation (TFO) method that combines a priori knowledge, local and global information for the automated identification of pectoral muscle on mammograms.
METHODS: The authors designed a gradient-based directional kernel (GDK) filter to enhance the linear texture structures, and a gradient-based texture analysis to extract a texture orientation image that represented the dominant texture orientation at each pixel. The texture orientation image was enhanced by a second GDK filter for ridge point extraction. The extracted ridge points were validated and the ridges that were less likely to lie on the pectoral boundary were removed automatically. A shortest-path finding method was used to generate a probability image that represented the likelihood that each remaining ridge point lay on the true pectoral boundary. Finally, the pectoral boundary was tracked by searching for the ridge points with the highest probability lying on the pectoral boundary. A data set of 130 MLO-view digitized film mammograms (DFMs) from 65 patients was used to train the TFO algorithm. An independent data set of 637 MLO-view DFMs from 562 patients was used to evaluate its performance. Another independent data set of 92 MLO-view full field digital mammograms (FFDMs) from 92 patients was used to assess the adaptability of the TFO algorithm to FFDMs. The pectoral boundary detection accuracy of the TFO method was quantified by comparison with an experienced radiologist's manually drawn pectoral boundary using three performance metrics: The percent overlap area (POA), the Hausdorff distance (Hdist), and the average distance (AvgDist).
RESULTS: The mean and standard deviation of POA, Hdist, and AvgDist were 95.0 +/- 3.6%, 3.45 +/- 2.16 mm, and 1.12 +/- 0.82 mm, respectively. For the POA measure, 91.5%, 97.3%, and 98.9% of the computer detected pectoral muscles had POA larger than 90%, 85%, and 80%, respectively. For the distance measures, 85.4% and 98.0% of the computer detected pectoral boundaries had Hdist within 5 and 10 mm, respectively, and 99.4% of computer detected pectoral muscle boundaries had AvgDist within 5 mm from the radiologist's manually drawn boundaries.
CONCLUSIONS: The pectoral muscle on DFMs can be detected accurately by the automated TFO method. The preliminary study of applying the same pectoral muscle identification algorithm to FFDMs without retraining demonstrates that the TFO method is reasonably robust against the differences in the image properties between the digitized and digital mammograms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20527563      PMCID: PMC2874042          DOI: 10.1118/1.3395576

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  11 in total

1.  Computerized image analysis: estimation of breast density on mammograms.

Authors:  C Zhou; H P Chan; N Petrick; M A Helvie; M M Goodsitt; B Sahiner; L M Hadjiiski
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Automated registration of breast lesions in temporal pairs of mammograms for interval change analysis--local affine transformation for improved localization.

Authors:  L Hadjiiski; H P Chan; B Sahiner; N Petrick; M A Helvie
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Improvement of computerized mass detection on mammograms: fusion of two-view information.

Authors:  Sophie Paquerault; Nicholas Petrick; Heang-Ping Chan; Berkman Sahiner; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  On the noise variance of a digital mammography system.

Authors:  Arthur Burgess
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Automatic pectoral muscle segmentation on mediolateral oblique view mammograms.

Authors:  Sze Man Kwok; Ramachandran Chandrasekhar; Yianni Attikiouzel; Mary T Rickard
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 10.048

6.  Joint two-view information for computerized detection of microcalcifications on mammograms.

Authors:  Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Mark A Helvie; Chinatana Paramagul; Jun Ge; Jun Wei; Chuan Zhou
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Automated classification of parenchymal patterns in mammograms.

Authors:  N Karssemeijer
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Segmentation of mammograms using multiple linked self-organizing neural networks.

Authors:  J Suckling; D R Dance; E Moskovic; D J Lewis; S G Blacker
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Automatic identification of the pectoral muscle in mammograms.

Authors:  R J Ferrari; R M Rangayyan; J E L Desautels; R A Borges; A F Frère
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 10.048

10.  Mammographic breast density--evidence for genetic correlations with established breast cancer risk factors.

Authors:  Julie A Douglas; Marie-Hélène Roy-Gagnon; Chuan Zhou; Braxton D Mitchell; Alan R Shuldiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11-24       Impact factor: 4.254

View more
  7 in total

1.  Robust Automatic Pectoral Muscle Segmentation from Mammograms Using Texture Gradient and Euclidean Distance Regression.

Authors:  Vibha Bafna Bora; Ashwin G Kothari; Avinash G Keskar
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Segmenting pectoralis muscle on digital mammograms by a Markov random field-maximum a posteriori model.

Authors:  Mei Ge; James G Mainprize; Gordon E Mawdsley; Martin J Yaffe
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-11-25

3.  Pectoral muscle detection in mammograms using local statistical features.

Authors:  Li Liu; Qian Liu; Wei Lu
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Automatic Pectoral Muscle Region Segmentation in Mammograms Using Genetic Algorithm and Morphological Selection.

Authors:  Rongbo Shen; Kezhou Yan; Fen Xiao; Jia Chang; Cheng Jiang; Ke Zhou
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Automated pectoral muscle identification on MLO-view mammograms: Comparison of deep neural network to conventional computer vision.

Authors:  Xiangyuan Ma; Jun Wei; Chuan Zhou; Mark A Helvie; Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Yao Lu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-03-12       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Shape-based Automatic Detection of Pectoral Muscle Boundary in Mammograms.

Authors:  Chunxiao Chen; Gao Liu; Jing Wang; Gail Sudlow
Journal:  J Med Biol Eng       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 1.553

7.  Fast volumetric registration method for tumor follow-up in pulmonary CT exams.

Authors:  José Silvestre Silva; João Cancela; Luísa Teixeira
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.