PURPOSE: An automatic, accurate and fast segmentation of hemorrhage in brain Computed Tomography (CT) images is necessary for quantification and treatment planning when assessing a large number of data sets. Though manual segmentation is accurate, it is time consuming and tedious. Semi-automatic methods need user interactions and might introduce variability in results. Our study proposes a modified distance regularized level set evolution (MDRLSE) algorithm for hemorrhage segmentation. METHODS: Study data set (from the ongoing CLEAR-IVH phase III clinical trial) is comprised of 200 sequential CT scans of 40 patients collected at 10 different hospitals using different machines/vendors. Data set contained both constant and variable slice thickness scans. Our study included pre-processing (filtering and skull removal), segmentation (MDRLSE which is a two-stage method with shrinking and expansion) with modified parameters for faster convergence and higher accuracy and post-processing (reduction in false positives and false negatives). RESULTS: Results are validated against the gold standard marked manually by a trained CT reader and neurologist. Data sets are grouped as small, medium and large based on the volume of blood. Statistical analysis is performed for both training and test data sets in each group. The median Dice statistical indices (DSI) for the 3 groups are 0.8971, 0.8580 and 0.9173 respectively. Pre- and post-processing enhanced the DSI by 8 and 4% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The MDRLSE improved the accuracy and speed for segmentation and calculation of the hemorrhage volume compared to the original DRLSE method. The method generates quantitative information, which is useful for specific decision making and reduces the time needed for the clinicians to localize and segment the hemorrhagic regions.
PURPOSE: An automatic, accurate and fast segmentation of hemorrhage in brain Computed Tomography (CT) images is necessary for quantification and treatment planning when assessing a large number of data sets. Though manual segmentation is accurate, it is time consuming and tedious. Semi-automatic methods need user interactions and might introduce variability in results. Our study proposes a modified distance regularized level set evolution (MDRLSE) algorithm for hemorrhage segmentation. METHODS: Study data set (from the ongoing CLEAR-IVH phase III clinical trial) is comprised of 200 sequential CT scans of 40 patients collected at 10 different hospitals using different machines/vendors. Data set contained both constant and variable slice thickness scans. Our study included pre-processing (filtering and skull removal), segmentation (MDRLSE which is a two-stage method with shrinking and expansion) with modified parameters for faster convergence and higher accuracy and post-processing (reduction in false positives and false negatives). RESULTS: Results are validated against the gold standard marked manually by a trained CT reader and neurologist. Data sets are grouped as small, medium and large based on the volume of blood. Statistical analysis is performed for both training and test data sets in each group. The median Dice statistical indices (DSI) for the 3 groups are 0.8971, 0.8580 and 0.9173 respectively. Pre- and post-processing enhanced the DSI by 8 and 4% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The MDRLSE improved the accuracy and speed for segmentation and calculation of the hemorrhage volume compared to the original DRLSE method. The method generates quantitative information, which is useful for specific decision making and reduces the time needed for the clinicians to localize and segment the hemorrhagic regions.
Authors: M L Flaherty; M Haverbusch; P Sekar; B Kissela; D Kleindorfer; C J Moomaw; L Sauerbeck; A Schneider; J P Broderick; D Woo Journal: Neurology Date: 2006-04-25 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: S M Davis; J Broderick; M Hennerici; N C Brun; M N Diringer; S A Mayer; K Begtrup; T Steiner Journal: Neurology Date: 2006-04-25 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Kelly H Zou; Simon K Warfield; Aditya Bharatha; Clare M C Tempany; Michael R Kaus; Steven J Haker; William M Wells; Ferenc A Jolesz; Ron Kikinis Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: S M Reza Soroushmehr; Pavani Davuluri; Somayeh Molaei; Rosalyn Hobson Hargraves; Yang Tang; Charles H Cockrell; Kevin Ward; Kayvan Najarian Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2015-07-25 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: P D Chang; E Kuoy; J Grinband; B D Weinberg; M Thompson; R Homo; J Chen; H Abcede; M Shafie; L Sugrue; C G Filippi; M-Y Su; W Yu; C Hess; D Chow Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-07-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yin Hu; Su Wang; Nan Ma; Suzanne M Hingley-Wilson; Andrea Rocco; Johnjoe McFadden; Hongying Lilian Tang Journal: R Soc Open Sci Date: 2017-05-24 Impact factor: 2.963
Authors: John Muschelli; Elizabeth M Sweeney; Natalie L Ullman; Paul Vespa; Daniel F Hanley; Ciprian M Crainiceanu Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2017-02-15 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Vidhya V; Anjan Gudigar; U Raghavendra; Ajay Hegde; Girish R Menon; Filippo Molinari; Edward J Ciaccio; U Rajendra Acharya Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-16 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Matthew F Sharrock; W Andrew Mould; Hasan Ali; Meghan Hildreth; Issam A Awad; Daniel F Hanley; John Muschelli Journal: Neuroinformatics Date: 2020-09-27