Literature DB >> 22957609

Computer-aided lymph node segmentation in volumetric CT data.

Reinhard R Beichel1, Yao Wang.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to develop and validate a computer-aided method for the 3D segmentation of lymph nodes in CT images. The proposed method can be utilized to facilitate applications like biopsy planning, image guided radiation treatment, or assessment of response to therapy.
METHODS: An optimal surface finding based lymph node segmentation method was developed. Based on the approximate center point of a lymph node of interest, a graph is generated, which represents the local neighborhood around the lymph node at discrete locations (graph nodes). A cost function is calculated based on a weighted edge and region homogeneity term. By means of optimization, a surface-based segmentation of the lymph node is derived. In addition, an interactive segmentation refinement algorithm was developed, which allows the user to quickly correct segmentation errors, if needed. For assessment of segmentation accuracy, 111 lymph nodes of mediastinum, abdomen, head/neck, and axillary regions from 35 volumetric CT scans were utilized. For accuracy analysis, lymph nodes were divided into three test sets based on lymph node size and spatial resolution of the CT scan. The average lymph node size for test set I, II, and III was 1056, 1621, and 501 mm(3), respectively. Spatial resolution of test set II was lower than for test sets I and III. To generate an independent reference standard for comparison, all 111 lymph nodes were segmented by an expert with a live wire approach.
RESULTS: All test sets were segmented with the proposed approach. Out of the 111 lymph nodes, 40 cases (36%) required computer-aided refinement of initial segmentation results. The refinement typically required 10 s per lymph node. The mean and standard deviation of the Dice coefficient for final segmentations was 0.847 ± 0.061, 0.836 ± 0.058, and 0.809 ± 0.070 for test sets I, II, and II, respectively. The average signed surface distance error was 0.023 ± 0.171, 0.394 ± 0.189, and 0.001 ± 0.146 mm for test sets I, II, and II, respectively. The time required for locating the approximate center point of a target lymph node in a scan, generating an initial OSF segmentation, and refining the segmentation, if needed, is typically less than one minute.
CONCLUSIONS: Segmentation of lymph nodes in volumetric CT images is a challenging task due to partial volume effects, nearby strong edges, neighboring structures with similar intensity profiles and potentially inhomogeneous density of lymph nodes. The presented approach addresses many of these obstacles. In the majority of cases investigated, the initial segmentation method delivered results that did not require further processing. In addition, the computer-aided segmentation refinement framework was found to be effective in dealing with potentially occurring segmentation errors.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22957609      PMCID: PMC3432102          DOI: 10.1118/1.4742845

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


  9 in total

1.  Lymph node segmentation from CT images using fast marching method.

Authors:  Jiayong Yan; Tian-ge Zhuang; Binsheng Zhao; Lawrence H Schwartz
Journal:  Comput Med Imaging Graph       Date:  2004 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 4.790

2.  Optimal surface segmentation in volumetric images--a graph-theoretic approach.

Authors:  Kang Li; Xiaodong Wu; Danny Z Chen; Milan Sonka
Journal:  IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 6.226

3.  Segmentation of neck lymph nodes in CT datasets with stable 3D mass-spring models segmentation of neck lymph nodes.

Authors:  Jana Dornheim; Heiko Seim; Bernhard Preim; Ilka Hertel; Gero Strauss
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Interactive live-wire boundary extraction.

Authors:  W A Barrett; E N Mortensen
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 8.545

5.  Variability in response assessment in solid tumors: effect of number of lesions chosen for measurement.

Authors:  Lawrence H Schwartz; Madhu Mazumdar; Wendy Brown; Alex Smith; David M Panicek
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Semi-automated volumetric analysis of lymph node metastases in patients with malignant melanoma stage III/IV--a feasibility study.

Authors:  M Fabel; H von Tengg-Kobligk; F L Giesel; L Bornemann; V Dicken; A Kopp-Schneider; C Moser; S Delorme; H-U Kauczor
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-02-15       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

Authors:  E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.162

8.  Evaluation of lymph nodes with RECIST 1.1.

Authors:  L H Schwartz; J Bogaerts; R Ford; L Shankar; P Therasse; S Gwyther; E A Eisenhauer
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 9.162

9.  Interobserver and intraobserver variability in measurement of non-small-cell carcinoma lung lesions: implications for assessment of tumor response.

Authors:  Jeremy J Erasmus; Gregory W Gladish; Lyle Broemeling; Bradley S Sabloff; Mylene T Truong; Roy S Herbst; Reginald F Munden
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-07-01       Impact factor: 44.544

  9 in total
  5 in total

Review 1.  Progress in Fully Automated Abdominal CT Interpretation.

Authors:  Ronald M Summers
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  3D Segmentation Algorithms for Computerized Tomographic Imaging: a Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  L E Carvalho; A C Sobieranski; A von Wangenheim
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Semiautomated segmentation of head and neck cancers in 18F-FDG PET scans: A just-enough-interaction approach.

Authors:  Reinhard R Beichel; Markus Van Tol; Ethan J Ulrich; Christian Bauer; Tangel Chang; Kristin A Plichta; Brian J Smith; John J Sunderland; Michael M Graham; Milan Sonka; John M Buatti
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Precision of manual two-dimensional segmentations of lung and liver metastases and its impact on tumour response assessment using RECIST 1.1.

Authors:  F H Cornelis; M Martin; O Saut; X Buy; M Kind; J Palussiere; T Colin
Journal:  Eur Radiol Exp       Date:  2017-10-30

5.  Approximation of head and neck cancer volumes in contrast enhanced CT.

Authors:  D Dejaco; C Url; V H Schartinger; A K Haug; N Fischer; D Riedl; A Posch; H Riechelmann; G Widmann
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 3.909

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.