| Literature DB >> 30602393 |
Mingjie Xu1, Shouliang Qi2,3, Yong Yue4, Yueyang Teng1, Lisheng Xu1, Yudong Yao1,5, Wei Qian1,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lung segmentation constitutes a critical procedure for any clinical-decision supporting system aimed to improve the early diagnosis and treatment of lung diseases. Abnormal lungs mainly include lung parenchyma with commonalities on CT images across subjects, diseases and CT scanners, and lung lesions presenting various appearances. Segmentation of lung parenchyma can help locate and analyze the neighboring lesions, but is not well studied in the framework of machine learning.Entities:
Keywords: CT; Clustering; Convolutional neural network; Lung parenchyma; Segmentation
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30602393 PMCID: PMC6317251 DOI: 10.1186/s12938-018-0619-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
Fig. 1The generation of the labeled data. a The procedures and corresponding results after each sub-step. b The generated dataset for the training and validation of the CNN
Fig. 2The network architecture of the proposed simplified CNN
The details of the train/validation dataset and the separate dataset
| Dataset | Number of patients | Number of slices | Number of lung parenchyma patches | Number of non-lung parenchyma patches | Total number of patches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The train/validation | 23 | 2460 | 60,864 | 60,864 | 121,728 |
| The separate | 201 | 19,967 | 415,612,531 | 4.2040 × 109 | 4.6196 × 109 |
The assessment of patch size through the segmentation characteristics and time consumption
| Patch Size | Time consumption for one patient | Characteristics of patch segmentation | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| 64 × 64 | 0.9306 s | Too rough, fast | Not considered |
| 32 × 32 | 1.2909 s | Rough, fast | Bad choice |
| 16 × 16 | 2.6340 s | Including other tissues such as fat, tumor and heart | Bad choice |
| 4 × 4 | 25.8358 s | Exquisite, but computationally expensive | Second choice |
| 2 × 2 | 98.0321 s | Very exquisite, but computationally expensive | Bad choice |
| 8 × 8 | 7.5695 s | Exquisite | Best choice |
Fig. 3Segmentations using k-means clustering with different patch sizes
Performance of the proposed CNNs with different parameters
| Kernel size | Kernel number | Channels of normalization | Output of FC | Dropout probability | Pooling type | Batch size | Epochs | Learning rate | Validation | Elapsed time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 | 3 | 120 | 0.5 | Max | 128 | 50 | 0.01 | 0.9688 | 1077.55 |
| 5 |
| 3 | 120 | 0.5 | Max | 128 | 50 | 0.01 | 0.9609 | 806.078 |
| 5 | 6 |
| 120 | 0.5 | Max | 128 | 50 | 0.01 | 0.9657 | 997.13 |
| 5 | 6 | 3 |
| 0.5 | Max | 128 | 50 | 0.01 | 0.9765 | 1282.90 |
| 5 | 6 | 3 | 120 |
| Max | 128 | 50 | 0.01 | 0.9688 | 1593.91 |
| 5 | 6 | 3 | 120 |
| Max | 128 | 50 | 0.01 | 0.9541 | 1589.37 |
| 5 | 6 | 3 | 120 | 0.5 |
| 128 | 50 | 0.01 | 0.9682 | 1606.79 |
| 5 | 6 | 3 | 120 | 0.5 | Max |
| 50 | 0.01 | 0.9659 | 905.27 |
| 5 | 6 | 3 | 120 | 0.5 | Max | 128 |
| 0.01 | 0.9722 | 2660.79 |
| 5 | 6 | 3 | 120 | 0.5 | Max | 128 | 50 |
| 0.9855 | 1566.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The kernel size and the kernel number are only related to the convolutional layer. FC represents the first fully connected layer in our proposed CNNs. The elapsed time indicates the time for training the CNN in different epochs
The Italic in the first row indicates the default setting of parameters. The Italic in final row indicates the final optimized setting of parameters. The Italic in other rows indicates the modifed parameter compared with the default setting
Fig. 4Performance of the trained CNN for lung parenchyma segmentation. a The training accuracy. b The training loss. c The six convolutional kernels. d The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. e The confusion matrix
Fig. 5Examples of segmentation at axial slices (In each sub-figure, there are three columns: the left the left column shows the results of manual segmentation of lung field including both lung parenchyma and lesions; the middle column presents the results of segmentation of lung parenchyma by our proposed method; the right column shows the results after a “hole-filling” operation from those by our method.). a Three example slices (three rows) for subjects with COPD. b Three example slices for subjects with lung cancer (CT scanner)
Fig. 6Examples of segmentation at axial slices (In each sub-figure, there are three columns: the left the left column shows the results of manual segmentation of lung field including both lung parenchyma and lesions; the middle column presents the results of segmentation of lung parenchyma by our proposed method; the right column shows the results after a “hole-filling” operation from those by our method.). a Three example slices (three rows) for subjects with lung cancer (PET-CT scanner). b Three example slices (three rows) for special cases where the pleural effusion, emphysema, inflammation are near the boundary the lung field
Fig. 7Examples of segmentation shown using 3D surface rendering
Comparison of the proposed method with the traditional methods
| Methods | DSC (vs observer A) (%) | DSC (vs observer B) | Average DSC | Self-adaptability |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iteration | 95.40 | 95.22 | 95.31 | 83.33 |
| Improved Ostu | 95.35 | 95.18 | 95.27 | 83.68 |
| Watershed | 94.72 | 94.49 | 94.61 | 62.50 |
| Region growing | 96.65 | 96.50 | 96.58 | 91.32 |
| Proposed method | 96.80 | 96.62 | 96.71 | 100 |
Fig. 8Segmentation of lung parenchyma using small patches