Literature DB >> 32856003

Towards Estimating the Uncertainty Associated with Three-Dimensional Geometry Reconstructed from Medical Image Data.

Marc Horner1, Stephen M Luke2, Kerim O Genc3, Todd M Pietila4, Ross T Cotton3, Benjamin A Ache5, Zachary H Levine6, Kevin C Townsend4.   

Abstract

Patient-specific computational modeling is increasingly used to assist with visualization, planning, and execution of medical treatments. This trend is placing more reliance on medical imaging to provide accurate representations of anatomical structures. Digital image analysis is used to extract anatomical data for use in clinical assessment/planning. However, the presence of image artifacts, whether due to interactions between the physical object and the scanning modality or the scanning process, can degrade image accuracy. The process of extracting anatomical structures from the medical images introduces additional sources of variability, e.g., when thresholding or when eroding along apparent edges of biological structures. An estimate of the uncertainty associated with extracting anatomical data from medical images would therefore assist with assessing the reliability of patient-specific treatment plans. To this end, two image datasets were developed and analyzed using standard image analysis procedures. The first dataset was developed by performing a "virtual voxelization" of a CAD model of a sphere, representing the idealized scenario of no error in the image acquisition and reconstruction algorithms (i.e., a perfect scan). The second dataset was acquired by scanning three spherical balls using a laboratory-grade CT scanner. For the idealized sphere, the error in sphere diameter was less than or equal to 2% if 5 or more voxels were present across the diameter. The measurement error degraded to approximately 4% for a similar degree of voxelization of the physical phantom. The adaptation of established thresholding procedures to improve segmentation accuracy was also investigated.

Entities:  

Keywords:  image reconstruction; medical imaging; patient-specific anatomy; systematic error

Year:  2019        PMID: 32856003      PMCID: PMC7448268     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Verif Valid Uncertain Quantif        ISSN: 2377-2158


  22 in total

1.  Three-dimensional segmentation and growth-rate estimation of small pulmonary nodules in helical CT images.

Authors:  William J Kostis; Anthony P Reeves; David F Yankelevitz; Claudia I Henschke
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 10.048

2.  Measurement of density variations in tablets using X-ray computed tomography.

Authors:  I C Sinka; S F Burch; J H Tweed; J C Cunningham
Journal:  Int J Pharm       Date:  2004-03-01       Impact factor: 5.875

3.  Volumetric measurements of pulmonary nodules at multi-row detector CT: in vivo reproducibility.

Authors:  Dag Wormanns; Gerhard Kohl; Ernst Klotz; Anke Marheine; Florian Beyer; Walter Heindel; Stefan Diederich
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-11-13       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  RECIST versus volume measurement in medical CT using ellipsoids of known size.

Authors:  Zachary H Levine; Bruce R Borchardt; Nolan J Brandenburg; Charles W Clark; Bala Muralikrishnan; Craig M Shakarji; Joseph J Chen; Eliot L Siegel
Journal:  Opt Express       Date:  2010-04-12       Impact factor: 3.894

5.  Uncertainty quantification in coronary blood flow simulations: Impact of geometry, boundary conditions and blood viscosity.

Authors:  Sethuraman Sankaran; Hyun Jin Kim; Gilwoo Choi; Charles A Taylor
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2016-01-09       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Inlet conditions for image-based CFD models of the carotid bifurcation: is it reasonable to assume fully developed flow?

Authors:  Keri R Moyle; Luca Antiga; David A Steinman
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.097

7.  Inherent variability of CT lung nodule measurements in vivo using semiautomated volumetric measurements.

Authors:  Lawrence R Goodman; Meltem Gulsun; Lacey Washington; Paul G Nagy; Kelly L Piacsek
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Minimum detectable change in lung nodule volume in a phantom CT study.

Authors:  Marios A Gavrielides; Qin Li; Rongping Zeng; Kyle J Myers; Berkman Sahiner; Nicholas Petrick
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 3.173

9.  Volume estimation of low-contrast lesions with CT: a comparison of performances from a phantom study, simulations and theoretical analysis.

Authors:  Qin Li; Marios A Gavrielides; Rongping Zeng; Kyle J Myers; Berkman Sahiner; Nicholas Petrick
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-01-02       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  A Low-Cost Fiducial Reference Phantom for Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Zachary H Levine; Steven Grantham; Daniel S Sawyer; Anthony P Reeves; David F Yankelevitz
Journal:  J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol       Date:  2008-12-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.