| Literature DB >> 21952080 |
Hum Yan Chai1, Lai Khin Wee, Tan Tian Swee, Sh-Hussain Salleh, Lim Yee Chea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Segmentation is the most crucial part in the computer-aided bone age assessment. A well-known type of segmentation performed in the system is adaptive segmentation. While providing better result than global thresholding method, the adaptive segmentation produces a lot of unwanted noise that could affect the latter process of epiphysis extraction.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21952080 PMCID: PMC3206476 DOI: 10.1186/1475-925X-10-87
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
Figure 1Dynamic threshold and unsupervised clustering method. In this figure, a framework of automated Bone Age Assessment (BAA) system is presented. The input radiograph will be diffused by using nonlinear anisotropic diffusion to smooth the image and enhance the edge, preparing it to the segmentation of hand bone from soft-tissue region using adaptive threshold and unsupervised clustering method, followed by a bounded area evaluation to eliminate noise and fill in lost detail; eventually ossification site is recognised, epiphyseal is extracted to be analyzed and bone age is determined.
Figure 2Flow chart for two dimensional anisotropic diffusion. In this figure, the flow of anisotropic diffusion is presented. A diffusion function has to be chosen, followed by determining a constant, κ. This constant is essential to define the edges and homogenous area; hence, different diffusion intensity is imposed on them. Subsequently, number of directions is to be chosen: either four directions or eight directions, as common practice. Then, the choice of integration constant, Δt: the effect of Δt can be viewed as an approximation for continuous case in integration for discrete implementation. Eventually, stopping criterion is to be determined: the maximum number of iteration.
Figure 3Flow chart for the bounded area evaluation (BAE) algorithms. In this figure, the main structure of BAE algorithms is illustrated. The input image will undergo a region labeling process of eight connected pixels. After that an evaluation of boundary of each label cluster is performed. Two errors are expected to be found: the surrounded area represents the lost detail; the non-surrounded label represents noises and redundant information. The undesired noise will be eliminated while the lost detail will be recovered.
The BAE algorithm
| Process | Equation |
|---|---|
| (a)Evaluate each pixel in n-label for 0 degree | |
| Evaluate each pixel for 45 degree | |
| Evaluate each pixel in n-label for 90 degree | |
| Evaluate each pixel in n-label for 135 degree | |
| Evaluate each pixel in n-label for 180 degree | |
| Evaluate each pixel in n-label for 225 degree | |
| Evaluate each pixel in n-label for 270 degree | |
| Evaluate each pixel in n-label for 315 degree | |
| (b)Stopping criteria: | [ |
| (c)Verification of bounded area for n-label | |
| (d)Repeat the process | n = n+1, |
| (e)Fill the pixels belong to bounded area with original value/background value |
This table illustrates the steps in the BAE process. Step in part (a) demonstrates the labelling process in each direction. Step in part (b) explains the stopping criteria. Step in part (c) defines the recognition of bounded area, for it a noise or lost data. The entire process mentioned above is repeated in step in part (d). Last step involves the filling in the lost data or elimination of noise.
Figure 4Comparison of radiographs before and after anisotropic diffusion. In this figure, a child's left hand bone radiograph is used to demonstrate the anisotropic diffusion effect: (a) Hand radiograph image before diffusion (b) Hand radiograph image after diffusion. As the result presents, the bone area has been smoothed to become homogenous area; the black holes and dots in have been filled by similar pixel intensity with the surrounding bone. Despite this filtering process, the edges of hand structure are preserved and can be clearly seen.
Comparison of image homogeneity of different age group before and after the anisotropic diffusion processing
| Age Group | Image Homogeneity | Image Homogeneity |
|---|---|---|
| 0-3 | 0.7056 | |
| 3-6 | 0.6984 | |
| 7-9 | 0.7132 | |
| 10-12 | 0.7189 | |
| 12-14 | 0.7028 | |
| 14-16 | 0.6927 | |
| 16-18 | 0.7056 |
This table tabulates the homogeneity value of hand radiograph before and after the anisotropic diffusion. 100 test images are chosen: the test image chosen randomly from each group age of children with different shapes and sizes. The homogeneity is based on the gray level co-occurrence matrix; it illustrates the texture of the resultant image: higher value indicates higher degree of smoothness and vice versa.
Figure 5Comparisons of radiograph processed by anisotropic diffusion with various alternatives. In this figure, the radiograph is diffused by different algorithm for comparison: (a) Original image (b) Gaussian filter (c) Average filter (d) Wiener filter (e) Symmetric Nearest Neighbor (SNN) filter (f) Anisotropic diffusion.
Comparison of homogeneity value before and after the BAE algorithms processing
| Bands | Homogeneity | Bands | Homogeneity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Row | Column | Before | After | Row | Column | Before | After |
| 2 | 2-10 | 0.6508 | 0.8815 | 11 | 2-10 | 0.6380 | 0.8814 |
| 3 | 2-10 | 0.6657 | 0.8820 | 12 | 2-10 | 0.6471 | 0.8812 |
| 4 | 2-10 | 0.6672 | 0.8811 | 13 | 2-10 | 0.6698 | 0.8905 |
| 5 | 2-10 | 0.6412 | 0.8830 | 14 | 2-10 | 0.6503 | 0.8821 |
| 6 | 2-10 | 0.6671 | 0.8806 | 15 | 2-10 | 0.6661 | 0.8903 |
| 7 | 2-10 | 0.6655 | 0.8806 | 16 | 2-10 | 0.6629 | 0.9012 |
| 8 | 2-10 | 0.6309 | 0.8803 | 17 | 2-10 | 0.6547 | 0.8805 |
| 9 | 2-10 | 0.6402 | 0.8833 | 18 | 2-10 | 0.6663 | 0.8907 |
| 10 | 2-10 | 0.6589 | 0.8827 | 19 | 2-10 | 0.6652 | 0.9110 |
The resultant images (randomly from each age group) of Adaptive Clustering Reconstruction (ACR) segmentation with different row and column number are tested with BAE algorithms. The average homogeneity of each resultant image before and after performing BAE algorithms is tabulated: The result shows that the homogeneity is higher after BAE algorithms.
Mean Structural Similarity (MSSIM) before and after the BAE algorithm processing
| Bands | MSSIM | Bands | MSSIM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Row | Column | Before | After | Row | Column | Before | After |
| 2 | 2-10 | 0.8345 | 0.9324 | 11 | 2-10 | 0.8640 | 0.9223 |
| 3 | 2-10 | 0.8423 | 0.9431 | 12 | 2-10 | 0.8595 | 0.9343 |
| 4 | 2-10 | 0.8355 | 0.9341 | 13 | 2-10 | 0.8420 | 0.9243 |
| 5 | 2-10 | 0.8785 | 0.9125 | 14 | 2-10 | 0.8298 | 0.9089 |
| 6 | 2-10 | 0.8523 | 0.9256 | 15 | 2-10 | 0.8482 | 0.9423 |
| 7 | 2-10 | 0.8397 | 0.9543 | 16 | 2-10 | 0.8210 | 0.9432 |
| 8 | 2-10 | 0.8450 | 0.9354 | 17 | 2-10 | 0.8323 | 0.9502 |
| 9 | 2-10 | 0.8574 | 0.9445 | 18 | 2-10 | 0.8489 | 0.9357 |
| 10 | 2-10 | 0.8259 | 0.9213 | 19 | 2-10 | 0.8518 | 0.9389 |
This table compares the MSSIM of each image tested in previous table 3 to evaluate the structural preserving ability of BAE. The result shows that the MSSIM before BAE algorithm is consistently lower than the MSSIM after performing BAE algorithm. This indicates that the BAE algorithm has contributed in preserving detail of the image. The MSSIM is improved averagely 10.49% after performing the BAE algorithm on the adaptive segmented hand radiograph.
Figure 6Comparison of hand radiograph before and after the BAE algorithms. In this figure, the image presented are (a) Hand radiograph before BAE (b) Recovery of the artifacts of finger radiograph (c) Hand radiograph with anomalies and noise (d) Finger radiograph free from anomalies and noise after BAE.