| Literature DB >> 29333354 |
Yingxia Liu1, Ziad Saleh2, Yulin Song2, Maria Chan2, Xiang Li2, Chengyu Shi2, Xin Qian3, Xiaoli Tang2.
Abstract
Segmentation of prostate Cone Beam CT (CBCT) images is an essential step towards real-time adaptive radiotherapy (ART). It is challenging for Calypso patients, as more artifacts generated by the beacon transponders are present on the images. We herein propose a novel wavelet-based segmentation algorithm for rectum, bladder, and prostate of CBCT images with implanted Calypso transponders. For a given CBCT, a Moving Window-Based Double Haar (MWDH) transformation is applied first to obtain the wavelet coefficients. Based on a user defined point in the object of interest, a cluster algorithm based adaptive thresholding is applied to the low frequency components of the wavelet coefficients, and a Lee filter theory based adaptive thresholding is applied on the high frequency components. For the next step, the wavelet reconstruction is applied to the thresholded wavelet coefficients. A binary (segmented) image of the object of interest is therefore obtained. 5 hypofractionated Calypso prostate patients with daily CBCT were studied. DICE, Sensitivity, Inclusiveness and ΔV were used to evaluate the segmentation result.Entities:
Keywords: CBCT; MWDH; Prostate Segmentation; Wavelets
Year: 2017 PMID: 29333354 PMCID: PMC5765771 DOI: 10.4236/ijmpcero.2017.63030
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Med Phys Clin Eng Radiat Oncol ISSN: 2168-5436
Figure 1The flow chart of the segmentation algorithm based on MWDH. TL and TH are the thresholds for low and high frequency components.
Figure 2The structure of DHWT.
Statistical results.
| Structure | Metrics | Patient 1 | Patient 2 | Patient 3 | Patient 4 | Patient 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rectum | DICE | 0.891 | 0.901 | 0.838 | 0.877 | 0.709 |
| Sensitivity | 0.954 | 0.899 | 0.98 | 0.976 | 0.758 | |
| Inclusiveness | 0.836 | 0.846 | 0.734 | 0.797 | 0.983 | |
| ΔV | 15.53% | 12.17% | 34.30% | 22.80% | 27.27% | |
| Prostate | DICE | 0.773 | 0.818 | 0.811 | 0.87 | 0.888 |
| Sensitivity | 0.926 | 0.886 | 0.933 | 0.928 | 0.938 | |
| Inclusiveness | 0.677 | 0.807 | 0.62 | 0.834 | 0.817 | |
| ΔV | 46.47% | 36.90% | 36.40% | 23.30% | 13.40% | |
| Bladder | DICE | 0.86 | 0.811 | 0.926 | 0.919 | 0.927 |
| Sensitivity | 0.832 | 0.765 | 0.953 | 0.912 | 0.939 | |
| Inclusiveness | 0.912 | 0.92 | 0.899 | 0.931 | 0.919 | |
| ΔV | 14.73% | 20.63% | 10.13% | 7.40% | 2.95% |
Figure 3Contour comparison between the segmentation (red) and ground truth (blue). The ones with inferior segmentation results were plotted using thicker lines. (a) Bladder; (b) Prostate; (c) Rectum.