Literature DB >> 21420892

The evaluation of single-view and multi-view fusion 3D echocardiography using image-driven segmentation and tracking.

Kashif Rajpoot1, Vicente Grau, J Alison Noble, Harald Becher, Cezary Szmigielski.   

Abstract

Real-time 3D echocardiography (RT3DE) promises a more objective and complete cardiac functional analysis by dynamic 3D image acquisition. Despite several efforts towards automation of left ventricle (LV) segmentation and tracking, these remain challenging research problems due to the poor-quality nature of acquired images usually containing missing anatomical information, speckle noise, and limited field-of-view (FOV). Recently, multi-view fusion 3D echocardiography has been introduced as acquiring multiple conventional single-view RT3DE images with small probe movements and fusing them together after alignment. This concept of multi-view fusion helps to improve image quality and anatomical information and extends the FOV. We now take this work further by comparing single-view and multi-view fused images in a systematic study. In order to better illustrate the differences, this work evaluates image quality and information content of single-view and multi-view fused images using image-driven LV endocardial segmentation and tracking. The image-driven methods were utilized to fully exploit image quality and anatomical information present in the image, thus purposely not including any high-level constraints like prior shape or motion knowledge in the analysis approaches. Experiments show that multi-view fused images are better suited for LV segmentation and tracking, while relatively more failures and errors were observed on single-view images.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21420892     DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2011.02.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Image Anal        ISSN: 1361-8415            Impact factor:   8.545


  7 in total

1.  Multiframe registration of real-time three-dimensional echocardiography time series.

Authors:  Harriët W Mulder; Marijn van Stralen; Heleen B van der Zwaan; K Y Esther Leung; Johan G Bosch; Josien P W Pluim
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-04-23

2.  Ultrasonic image analysis and image-guided interventions.

Authors:  J Alison Noble; Nassir Navab; H Becher
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 3.906

3.  Real-time image-based rigid registration of three-dimensional ultrasound.

Authors:  Robert J Schneider; Douglas P Perrin; Nikolay V Vasilyev; Gerald R Marx; Pedro J Del Nido; Robert D Howe
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 8.545

Review 4.  Innovation in 3D Echocardiographic Imaging.

Authors:  Pei-Ni Jone; Nee Khoo
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2018-01-19

5.  Three-dimensional echocardiography in a dynamic heart phantom: comparison of five different methods to measure chamber volume using a commercially available software.

Authors:  Peter W Wood; Patrick H Gibson; Harald Becher
Journal:  Echo Res Pract       Date:  2014-10-09

6.  Multi-view secondary input collaborative deep learning for lung nodule 3D segmentation.

Authors:  Xianling Dong; Shiqi Xu; Yanli Liu; Aihui Wang; M Iqbal Saripan; Li Li; Xiaolei Zhang; Lijun Lu
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 3.909

7.  Identification of ultrasound imaging markers to quantify long bone regeneration in a segmental tibial defect sheep model in vivo.

Authors:  Songyuan Tang; Peer Shajudeen; Ennio Tasciotti; Raffaella Righetti
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.