PURPOSE: Several methods have been proposed for the segmentation of ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in PET. In this study, we assessed the performance of four categories of ¹⁸F-FDG PET image segmentation techniques in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma using clinical studies where the surgical specimen served as the benchmark. METHODS: Nine PET image segmentation techniques were compared including: five thresholding methods; the level set technique (active contour); the stochastic expectation-maximization approach; fuzzy clustering-based segmentation (FCM); and a variant of FCM, the spatial wavelet-based algorithm (FCM-SW) which incorporates spatial information during the segmentation process, thus allowing the handling of uptake in heterogeneous lesions. These algorithms were evaluated using clinical studies in which the segmentation results were compared to the 3-D biological tumour volume (BTV) defined by histology in PET images of seven patients with T3-T4 laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent a total laryngectomy. The macroscopic tumour specimens were collected "en bloc", frozen and cut into 1.7- to 2-mm thick slices, then digitized for use as reference. RESULTS: The clinical results suggested that four of the thresholding methods and expectation-maximization overestimated the average tumour volume, while a contrast-oriented thresholding method, the level set technique and the FCM-SW algorithm underestimated it, with the FCM-SW algorithm providing relatively the highest accuracy in terms of volume determination (-5.9 ± 11.9%) and overlap index. The mean overlap index varied between 0.27 and 0.54 for the different image segmentation techniques. The FCM-SW segmentation technique showed the best compromise in terms of 3-D overlap index and statistical analysis results with values of 0.54 (0.26-0.72) for the overlap index. CONCLUSION: The BTVs delineated using the FCM-SW segmentation technique were seemingly the most accurate and approximated closely the 3-D BTVs defined using the surgical specimens. Adaptive thresholding techniques need to be calibrated for each PET scanner and acquisition/processing protocol, and should not be used without optimization.
PURPOSE: Several methods have been proposed for the segmentation of ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in PET. In this study, we assessed the performance of four categories of ¹⁸F-FDGPET image segmentation techniques in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma using clinical studies where the surgical specimen served as the benchmark. METHODS: Nine PET image segmentation techniques were compared including: five thresholding methods; the level set technique (active contour); the stochastic expectation-maximization approach; fuzzy clustering-based segmentation (FCM); and a variant of FCM, the spatial wavelet-based algorithm (FCM-SW) which incorporates spatial information during the segmentation process, thus allowing the handling of uptake in heterogeneous lesions. These algorithms were evaluated using clinical studies in which the segmentation results were compared to the 3-D biological tumour volume (BTV) defined by histology in PET images of seven patients with T3-T4 laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent a total laryngectomy. The macroscopic tumour specimens were collected "en bloc", frozen and cut into 1.7- to 2-mm thick slices, then digitized for use as reference. RESULTS: The clinical results suggested that four of the thresholding methods and expectation-maximization overestimated the average tumour volume, while a contrast-oriented thresholding method, the level set technique and the FCM-SW algorithm underestimated it, with the FCM-SW algorithm providing relatively the highest accuracy in terms of volume determination (-5.9 ± 11.9%) and overlap index. The mean overlap index varied between 0.27 and 0.54 for the different image segmentation techniques. The FCM-SW segmentation technique showed the best compromise in terms of 3-D overlap index and statistical analysis results with values of 0.54 (0.26-0.72) for the overlap index. CONCLUSION: The BTVs delineated using the FCM-SW segmentation technique were seemingly the most accurate and approximated closely the 3-D BTVs defined using the surgical specimens. Adaptive thresholding techniques need to be calibrated for each PET scanner and acquisition/processing protocol, and should not be used without optimization.
Authors: K Wienhard; M Dahlbom; L Eriksson; C Michel; T Bruckbauer; U Pietrzyk; W D Heiss Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 1994 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Quinten C Black; Inga S Grills; Larry L Kestin; Ching-Yee O Wong; John W Wong; Alvaro A Martinez; Di Yan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-11-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Kenneth J Biehl; Feng-Ming Kong; Farrokh Dehdashti; Jian-Yue Jin; Sasa Mutic; Issam El Naqa; Barry A Siegel; Jeffrey D Bradley Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Mathieu Hatt; John A Lee; Charles R Schmidtlein; Issam El Naqa; Curtis Caldwell; Elisabetta De Bernardi; Wei Lu; Shiva Das; Xavier Geets; Vincent Gregoire; Robert Jeraj; Michael P MacManus; Osama R Mawlawi; Ursula Nestle; Andrei B Pugachev; Heiko Schöder; Tony Shepherd; Emiliano Spezi; Dimitris Visvikis; Habib Zaidi; Assen S Kirov Journal: Med Phys Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Jon Cacicedo; Arturo Navarro; Olga Del Hoyo; Alfonso Gomez-Iturriaga; Filippo Alongi; Jose A Medina; Olgun Elicin; Andrea Skanjeti; Francesco Giammarile; Pedro Bilbao; Francisco Casquero; Berardino de Bari; Alan Dal Pra Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Liyuan Chen; Chenyang Shen; Zhiguo Zhou; Genevieve Maquilan; Kevin Albuquerque; Michael R Folkert; Jing Wang Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2019-04-12 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Abhinav K Jha; Esther Mena; Brian Caffo; Saeed Ashrafinia; Arman Rahmim; Eric Frey; Rathan M Subramaniam Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2017-03-03
Authors: Gianpiero Manca; Eleonora Vanzi; Domenico Rubello; Francesco Giammarile; Gaia Grassetto; Ka Kit Wong; Alan C Perkins; Patrick M Colletti; Duccio Volterrani Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Rudolf A Werner; Matthias Kroiss; Masatoyo Nakajo; Dirk O Mügge; Stefanie Hahner; Martin Fassnacht; Andreas Schirbel; Christina Bluemel; Takahiro Higuchi; Laszló Papp; Norbert Zsótér; Andreas K Buck; Ralph A Bundschuh; Constantin Lapa Journal: Endocrine Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Anne I J Arens; Esther G C Troost; Bianca A W Hoeben; Willem Grootjans; John A Lee; Vincent Grégoire; Mathieu Hatt; Dimitris Visvikis; Johan Bussink; Wim J G Oyen; Johannes H A M Kaanders; Eric P Visser Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-12-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Dominic A X Schinagl; Paul N Span; Frank J A van den Hoogen; Matthias A W Merkx; Piet J Slootweg; Wim J G Oyen; Johannes H A M Kaanders Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 9.236