| Literature DB >> 34127870 |
Shixuan Zhao1, Zhidan Li1, Yang Chen2, Wei Zhao3, Xingzhi Xie3, Jun Liu3,4, Di Zhao5, Yongjie Li1.
Abstract
Automatic segmentation of lung opacification from computed tomography (CT) images shows excellent potential for quickly and accurately quantifying the infection of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and judging the disease development and treatment response. However, some challenges still exist, including the complexity and variability features of the opacity regions, the small difference between the infected and healthy tissues, and the noise of CT images. Due to limited medical resources, it is impractical to obtain a large amount of data in a short time, which further hinders the training of deep learning models. To answer these challenges, we proposed a novel spatial- and channel-wise coarse-to-fine attention network (SCOAT-Net), inspired by the biological vision mechanism, for the segmentation of COVID-19 lung opacification from CT images. With the UNet++ as basic structure, our SCOAT-Net introduces the specially designed spatial-wise and channel-wise attention modules, which serve to collaboratively boost the attention learning of the network and extract the efficient features of the infected opacification regions at the pixel and channel levels. Experiments show that our proposed SCOAT-Net achieves better results compared to several state-of-the-art image segmentation networks and has acceptable generalization ability.Entities:
Keywords: Attention mechanism; COVID-19; Convolutional neural network; Lung opacification; Segmentation
Year: 2021 PMID: 34127870 PMCID: PMC8189738 DOI: 10.1016/j.patcog.2021.108109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pattern Recognit ISSN: 0031-3203 Impact factor: 7.740
Fig. 1Comparison of UNet++ (a) and the proposed SCOAT-Net (b). The main difference in the network structure between the two models is that our SCOAT-Net introduces the new spatial-wise attention module (the light-green nodes in (b)) and extends some convolution units to the channel-wise module (the light-orange nodes in (b)). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 2The detailed structures of the proposed spatial-wise attention module and channel-wise attention module.
Quantitative evaluation of SCOAT-Net with different loss functions for lung opacification segmentation.
| Loss functions | Results (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DSC | SEN | PPV | VA | RLP | RLR | |
| MSE | 83.22 | 71.89 | 83.86 | 87.00 | 81.68 | 81.75 |
| IOU | 75.29 | 71.72 | 81.57 | 76.76 | 80.69 | 76.23 |
| BCE | 87.76 | 80.04 | 89.62 | 94.37 | 89.35 | 84.97 |
| Dice | 84.61 | 88.03 | 86.43 | 87.13 | 85.26 | 83.85 |
| Focal | 85.38 | 84.27 | 89.22 | 86.84 | 86.16 | 80.37 |
| BCE-Dice | 88.99 | 87.85 | 90.28 | 96.25 | 90.87 | 84.83 |
Fig. 3The segmentation performances of SCOAT-Net with BCE-Dice loss function.
Quantitative evaluation of different networks for lung opacification segmentation. The BCE-Dice loss was used for training.
| Methods | DSC (%) | SEN (%) | PPV (%) | VA (%) | RLP (%) | RLR (%) | 95% HD(mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PSPNet | 80.86 | 75.67 | 88.87 | 84.42 | 89.12 | 76.24 | 59.93 |
| ESPNetv2 | 83.19 | 79.77 | 88.61 | 89.03 | 67.84 | 78.31 | 63.96 |
| DenseASPP | 86.87 | 85.76 | 88.98 | 94.83 | 88.62 | 78.71 | 51.96 |
| DeepLabV3+ | 85.26 | 83.97 | 88.33 | 93.75 | 89.16 | 78.57 | 53.61 |
| U-Net | 83.61 | 82.96 | 85.57 | 92.57 | 86.18 | 76.48 | 73.50 |
| COPLE-Net | 83.70 | 84.27 | 83.42 | 93.45 | 77.46 | 74.60 | 59.21 |
| CE-Net | 85.78 | 84.46 | 87.88 | 94.70 | 82.79 | 79.45 | 55.85 |
| Attention U-Net | 82.66 | 79.95 | 86.58 | 90.43 | 88.20 | 75.22 | 60.97 |
| UNet+ | 81.83 | 80.29 | 84.03 | 91.87 | 80.30 | 76.72 | 74.32 |
| Proposed | 88.99 | 87.85 | 90.28 | 96.25 | 90.87 | 84.83 | 29.16 |
Fig. 4Visual comparison of segmentation performance of different models trained with BCE-Dice loss function. The red curves represent the ground truth, and the cyan curves represent the results of different models. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 5Visualization of the segmentation results of Unet++ and SCOAT-Net (the left three columns) and the attention maps of our SCOAT-Net (the right three columns) on three COVID-19 cases. The red areas on the images of the left three columns are the lung opacification segmentation of the ground truth and the results of UNet++ and our SCOAT-Net, and the yellow arrows highlight some local differences of the segmentation results. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Quantitative evaluation of different attention module for segmentation. The baseline network is UNet++.
| Methods | Params | Results (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DSC | SEN | PPV | VA | RLP | RLR | ||
| U-Net | 30.01M | 83.61 | 82.96 | 85.57 | 92.57 | 86.18 | 76.48 |
| U-Net&A1 | 32.08M | 82.66 | 79.95 | 86.58 | 90.43 | 88.20 | 75.22 |
| U-Net&A2 | 30.03M | 83.58 | 80.83 | 87.42 | 91.37 | 86.85 | 77.77 |
| U-Net&SCOAT | 32.97M | 85.74 | 85.16 | 86.47 | 95.72 | 85.57 | 77.36 |
| UNet+ | 35.05M | 81.83 | 80.29 | 84.03 | 91.87 | 80.30 | 76.72 |
| UNet+&A1 | 37.69M | 86.10 | 84.76 | 87.69 | 95.78 | 88.97 | 79.66 |
| UNet+&A2 | 35.09M | 82.64 | 81.89 | 83.67 | 93.37 | 80.47 | 77.29 |
| UNet+&SCOAT | 39.15M | 88.99 | 87.85 | 90.28 | 96.25 | 90.87 | 84.83 |
Fig. 6Qualitative evaluation of the results of SCOAT-Net on two cases from other type of CT scan. A and B show the evolution of one COVID-19 case during the 24-day treatment period. C and D show the evolution of another case during the 21-day treatment period. A and C are axial unenhanced chest CT images at four time points (dates are annotated in the lower-right corner of each panel); B and D are the coronal reconstructions at the same time points. The segmentation of pulmonary opacities derived from SCOAT-Net is displayed in red, and the volumetric assessment of our results (i.e., lung opacification volume (LOV)) is annotated in the lower-right corners of the images of B and C. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Validation of different networks for lung infection segmentation on the KAGGLE dataset.
| Methods | DSC (%) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case #1 | Case #2 | Case #3 | Case #4 | Case #5 | Case #6 | Case #7 | Case #8 | Case #9 | Average | |
| PSPNet | 68.27 | 67.41 | 78.14 | 64.06 | 78.61 | 48.92 | 48.52 | 0.00 | 76.38 | 58.92 |
| ESPNetv2 | 69.27 | 72.93 | 75.33 | 55.16 | 70.34 | 54.98 | 62.95 | 8.07 | 68.64 | 59.74 |
| DenseASPP | 62.82 | 67.98 | 74.16 | 68.26 | 62.95 | 37.46 | 58.04 | 14.33 | 59.30 | 56.15 |
| DeepLabV3+ | 66.73 | 70.10 | 73.14 | 63.80 | 61.11 | 38.13 | 60.58 | 14.01 | 63.07 | 56.74 |
| U-Net | 65.65 | 78.36 | 54.95 | 68.04 | 76.30 | 62.37 | 54.55 | 11.47 | 78.50 | 61.13 |
| COPLE-Net | 59.72 | 43.36 | 75.90 | 54.48 | 59.92 | 14.71 | 54.30 | 6.62 | 49.18 | 46.47 |
| CE-Net | 68.20 | 79.73 | 72.69 | 58.37 | 78.76 | 52.37 | 62.04 | 0.69 | 72.47 | 60.59 |
| Attention U-Net | 66.95 | 80.39 | 72.67 | 70.36 | 79.44 | 62.28 | 62.83 | 8.89 | 77.97 | 64.64 |
| UNet+ | 67.39 | 76.52 | 73.44 | 63.95 | 78.57 | 65.26 | 60.98 | 8.84 | 70.67 | 62.85 |
| Proposed | 68.74 | 79.12 | 79.98 | 70.88 | 77.63 | 57.91 | 64.89 | 27.72 | 80.43 | 67.48 |
Quantitative evaluation of different networks for GGO and consolidation segmentation.
| Methods | IOU (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| GGO | Consolidation | |
| ENet | 51.54 | 53.99 |
| U-Net | 58.75 | 62.18 |
| KISEG | 56.74 | 64.03 |
| Proposed | 52.32 | 66.29 |