Leah A Groves1, Blake VanBerlo2, Natan Veinberg2, Abdulrahman Alboog3, Terry M Peters4, Elvis C S Chen4. 1. School of Biomedical Engineering, Western University, London, Canada. lgroves6@uwo.ca. 2. Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada. 3. Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Western University, London, Canada. 4. Department of Medical Biophysics, School of Biomedical Engineering, Robarts Research, London, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In the context of analyzing neck vascular morphology, this work formulates and compares Mask R-CNN and U-Net-based algorithms to automatically segment the carotid artery (CA) and internal jugular vein (IJV) from transverse neck ultrasound (US). METHODS: US scans of the neck vasculature were collected to produce a dataset of 2439 images and their respective manual segmentations. Fourfold cross-validation was employed to train and evaluate Mask RCNN and U-Net models. The U-Net algorithm includes a post-processing step that selects the largest connected segmentation for each class. A Mask R-CNN-based vascular reconstruction pipeline was validated by performing a surface-to-surface distance comparison between US and CT reconstructions from the same patient. RESULTS: The average CA and IJV Dice scores produced by the Mask R-CNN across the evaluation data from all four sets were [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. The average Dice scores produced by the post-processed U-Net were [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text], for the CA and IJV, respectively. The reconstruction algorithm utilizing the Mask R-CNN was capable of producing accurate 3D reconstructions with majority of US reconstruction surface points being within 2 mm of the CT equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: On average, the Mask R-CNN produced more accurate vascular segmentations compared to U-Net. The Mask R-CNN models were used to produce 3D reconstructed vasculature with a similar accuracy to that of a manually segmented CT scan. This implementation of the Mask R-CNN network enables automatic analysis of the neck vasculature and facilitates 3D vascular reconstruction.
PURPOSE: In the context of analyzing neck vascular morphology, this work formulates and compares Mask R-CNN and U-Net-based algorithms to automatically segment the carotid artery (CA) and internal jugular vein (IJV) from transverse neck ultrasound (US). METHODS: US scans of the neck vasculature were collected to produce a dataset of 2439 images and their respective manual segmentations. Fourfold cross-validation was employed to train and evaluate Mask RCNN and U-Net models. The U-Net algorithm includes a post-processing step that selects the largest connected segmentation for each class. A Mask R-CNN-based vascular reconstruction pipeline was validated by performing a surface-to-surface distance comparison between US and CT reconstructions from the same patient. RESULTS: The average CA and IJV Dice scores produced by the Mask R-CNN across the evaluation data from all four sets were [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. The average Dice scores produced by the post-processed U-Net were [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text], for the CA and IJV, respectively. The reconstruction algorithm utilizing the Mask R-CNN was capable of producing accurate 3D reconstructions with majority of US reconstruction surface points being within 2 mm of the CT equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: On average, the Mask R-CNN produced more accurate vascular segmentations compared to U-Net. The Mask R-CNN models were used to produce 3D reconstructed vasculature with a similar accuracy to that of a manually segmented CT scan. This implementation of the Mask R-CNN network enables automatic analysis of the neck vasculature and facilitates 3D vascular reconstruction.
Authors: V Couteaux; S Si-Mohamed; O Nempont; T Lefevre; A Popoff; G Pizaine; N Villain; I Bloch; A Cotten; L Boussel Journal: Diagn Interv Imaging Date: 2019-03-23 Impact factor: 4.026
Authors: Golafsoun Ameri; John S H Baxter; Daniel Bainbridge; Terry M Peters; Elvis C S Chen Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Raymond L Merritt; Michael E Hachadorian; Kristof Michaels; Eric Zevallos; Kubwimana M Mhayamaguru; Zuheily Closser; Charlotte Derr Journal: J Emerg Trauma Shock Date: 2018 Jul-Sep
Authors: Luca Saba; Skandha S Sanagala; Suneet K Gupta; Vijaya K Koppula; Amer M Johri; Narendra N Khanna; Sophie Mavrogeni; John R Laird; Gyan Pareek; Martin Miner; Petros P Sfikakis; Athanasios Protogerou; Durga P Misra; Vikas Agarwal; Aditya M Sharma; Vijay Viswanathan; Vijay S Rathore; Monika Turk; Raghu Kolluri; Klaudija Viskovic; Elisa Cuadrado-Godia; George D Kitas; Neeraj Sharma; Andrew Nicolaides; Jasjit S Suri Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2021-07
Authors: L Saba; C Loewe; T Weikert; M C Williams; N Galea; R P J Budde; R Vliegenthart; B K Velthuis; M Francone; J Bremerich; L Natale; K Nikolaou; J N Dacher; C Peebles; F Caobelli; A Redheuil; M Dewey; K F Kreitner; R Salgado Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2022-10-04 Impact factor: 7.034
Authors: Courtney A Patterson; Robert Amelard; Essi Saarikoski; Hannah Heigold; Richard L Hughson; Andrew D Robertson Journal: Physiol Rep Date: 2022-02