Journals / Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science / 2015 / Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 3

A comparative performance evaluation of various approaches for liver segmentation from SPIR images

Pages
741
Publication Date
2015-08-13
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The automatic method using the distance regularized level set evolution with signed pressure force function avoids the sensitivity of a user-defined initial contour for each slice, gives the most efficient results for liver segmentation after the preprocessing steps, and also requires less computational time.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Developing a robust method for liver segmentation from magnetic resonance images is a challenging task because of the similar intensity values between adjacent organs, the geometrically complex liver structure, and injection of contrast media.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this paper, we present an overview of liver segmentation methods in magnetic resonance images and show comparative results of seven different pseudo-3D liver segmentation approaches chosen from deterministic (K-means-based), probabilistic (Gaussian model-based), supervised neural network (multilayer perceptron-based), and deformable model-based (level set) segmentation methods.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The automatic method using the distance regularized level set evolution with signed pressure force function avoids the sensitivity of a user-defined initial contour for each slice, gives the most efficient results for liver segmentation after the preprocessing steps, and also requires less computational time.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Gaussian mixture model · k-means · level set

Abstract

Developing a robust method for liver segmentation from magnetic resonance images is a challenging task because of the similar intensity values between adjacent organs, the geometrically complex liver structure, and injection of contrast media. Most importantly, a high anatomical variability of a healthy or diseased liver is a major challenge in defining the exact boundaries of the liver. Several artifacts of pulsation, motion, and partial volume effects are also among the variety of factors that make automatic liver segmentation difficult. In this paper, we present an overview of liver segmentation methods in magnetic resonance images and show comparative results of seven different pseudo-3D liver segmentation approaches chosen from deterministic (K-means-based), probabilistic (Gaussian model-based), supervised neural network (multilayer perceptron-based), and deformable model-based (level set) segmentation methods. The results of quantitative and qualitative analyses using sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy metrics show that the multilayer perceptron-based approach and a level set-based approach, both of which use distance regularization terms and signed pressure force function, are the most successful methods for liver segmentation from spectral presaturation inversion recovery (SPIR) images. However, the multilayer perceptron-based segmentation method has a higher computational cost. The automatic method using the distance regularized level set evolution with signed pressure force function avoids the sensitivity of a user-defined initial contour for each slice, gives the most efficient results for liver segmentation after the preprocessing steps, and also requires less computational time.

Özet

Developing a robust method for liver segmentation from magnetic resonance images is a challenging task because of the similar intensity values between adjacent organs, the geometrically complex liver structure, and injection of contrast media. Most importantly, a high anatomical variability of a healthy or diseased liver is a major challenge in defining the exact boundaries of the liver. Several artifacts of pulsation, motion, and partial volume effects are also among the variety of factors that make automatic liver segmentation difficult. In this paper, we present an overview of liver segmentation methods in magnetic resonance images and show comparative results of seven different pseudo-3D liver segmentation approaches chosen from deterministic (K-means-based), probabilistic (Gaussian model-based), supervised neural network (multilayer perceptron-based), and deformable model-based (level set) segmentation methods. The results of quantitative and qualitative analyses using sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy metrics show that the multilayer perceptron-based approach and a level set-based approach, both of which use distance regularization terms and signed pressure force function, are the most successful methods for liver segmentation from spectral presaturation inversion recovery (SPIR) images. However, the multilayer perceptron-based segmentation method has a higher computational cost. The automatic method using the distance regularized level set evolution with signed pressure force function avoids the sensitivity of a user-defined initial contour for each slice, gives the most efficient results for liver segmentation after the preprocessing steps, and also requires less computational time.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖÇERİ, E., ÜNLÜ, M. Z., DİCLE, O. (2015). A comparative performance evaluation of various approaches for liver segmentation from SPIR images. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 3, 741. https://ajindex.com/articles/187789

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. have applied the MLP-based liver segmentation method after several preprocessing steps and obtained more successful results. However, the drawback of this method is a very high computational cost. We also have explained the properties of two different recently published level set-based segmentation techniques and presented their implementation results for liver segmentation. The FTC algorithm, which uses a switching mechanism, seems successful and can give acceptable results when preprocessed abdominal images are used. However, the drawback of the FTC algorithm is its sensitivity for initial contours that are defined in each slice. This is because the accuracy of the results depends not only on the size of the initial contours drawn by users, but also on the number of initial contours and their positions. In addition, the user-defined iteration numbers for each slice affect the segmentation results. Therefore, this approach is not robust, and it generates oversegmented or undersegmented images on some slices. In order to overcome these drawbacks, we have applied an automatic method iteratively using the FTC algorithm without any user interaction and with a small fixed number of iterations for liver segmentation from SPIR datasets. However, we have observed that automatic liver segmentation using the FTC method is not successful for SPIR datasets, even if preprocessed images are used. Therefore, we have applied the DRLSE with SPF function-based automatic segmentation method, which gives fast and acceptable results without any postprocessing operation. Moreover, this method has the ability to segment liver images without extracting adjacent organs except the gallbladder. In addition, it is more efficient than the MLP-based segmentation method in terms of the required segmentation time. Both qualitative and quantitative comparison results of eight different active contour methods (except the application specific methods) are presented in [73] for brain MR images, ultrasound pig heart images, kidney CT images, knee MR images, and microscopy blood cell images. However, there is no comparative study for liver segmentation on SPIR images, which show the vascular structure of the liver very clearly and are very useful for vessel segmentation. None of the proposed approaches, namely, the deterministic iterative method (K-means based segmentation), the probabilistic model-based iterative method (GMM-based segmentation with EM), the supervised learning method (MLP-ba