arrow
返回

Dynamic multiple thresholding breast boundary detection algorithm for mammograms

delete2009-12-28
delete16
delete
OA
AI
Y
Yi‐Ta Wu *
C
Chuan Zhou
H
Heang‐Ping Chan
C
Chintana Paramagul
L
Lubomir M. Hadjiiski
C
Caroline Plowden Daly
J
Julie A. Douglas
Y
Yiheng Zhang
B
Berkman Sahiner
J
Jun Wei
DOI:10.1118/1.3273062delete
delete原文链接
delete分享
delete收藏
查看原文
摘要

摘要

En 中文
Purpose: Automated detection of breast boundary is one of the fundamental steps for computer-aided analysis of mammograms. In this study, the authors developed a new dynamic multiple thresholding based breast boundary (MTBB) detection method for digitized mammograms. Methods: A large data set of 716 screen-film mammograms (442 CC view and 274 MLO view) obtained from consecutive cases of an Institutional Review Board approved project were used. An experienced breast radiologist manually traced the breast boundary on each digitized image using a graphical interface to provide a reference standard. The initial breast boundary (MTBB-Initial) was obtained by dynamically adapting the threshold to the gray level range in local regions of the breast periphery. The initial breast boundary was then refined by using gradient information from horizontal and vertical Sobel filtering to obtain the final breast boundary (MTBB-Final). The accuracy of the breast boundary detection algorithm was evaluated by comparison with the reference standard using three performance metrics: The Hausdorff distance (HDist), the average minimum Euclidean distance (AMinDist), and the area overlap measure (AOM). Results: In comparison with the authors' previously developed gradient-based breast boundary (GBB) algorithm, it was found that 68%, 85%, and 94% of images had HDist errors less than 6 pixels (4.8 mm) for GBB, MTBB-Initial, and MTBB-Final, respectively. 89%, 90%, and 96% of images had AMinDist errors less than 1.5 pixels (1.2 mm) for GBB, MTBB-Initial, and MTBB-Final, respectively. 96%, 98%, and 99% of images had AOM values larger than 0.9 for GBB, MTBB-Initial, and MTBB-Final, respectively. The improvement by the MTBB-Final method was statistically significant for all the evaluation measures by the Wilcoxon signed rank test (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The MTBB approach that combined dynamic multiple thresholding and gradient information provided better performance than the breast boundary detection algorithm that mainly used gradient information. (C) 2010 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. [DOI: 10.1118/1.3273062]
Keyword:
breast boundary detection
computer-aided detection
mammogram
multiple thresholding
AI总结

AI总结

对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取,主要内容包括:简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。

期刊

Medical Physics 封面图
Medical Physics
IF:
3.2
论文数:
3.7W
被引数:
3.2W

机构

U
University of Michigan
学者数:
6.4W
论文数: 5.3W
被引数: 124
U
university of michigan system
学者数:
9.1W
论文数: 8.6W
被引数: 133