Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional iterative watershed segmentation methods in hepatic tumor volumetrics

被引:16
|
作者
Ray, Shonket [1 ,2 ]
Hagge, Rosalie [2 ]
Gillen, Marijo [2 ]
Cerejo, Miguel [2 ]
Shakeri, Shidrokh [2 ]
Beckett, Laurel [3 ]
Greasby, Tamara [3 ]
Badawi, Ramsey D. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Davis, Dept Biomed Engn, Davis, CA 95616 USA
[2] Univ Calif Davis, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Sacramento, CA 95817 USA
[3] Univ Calif Davis, Div Biostat, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, Davis, CA 95616 USA
关键词
biomedical measurement; cancer; computerised tomography; fuzzy set theory; gradient methods; image segmentation; liver; medical image processing; phantoms; positron emission tomography; tumours; volume measurement;
D O I
10.1118/1.3013561
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
In this work the authors compare the accuracy of two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) implementations of a computer-aided image segmentation method to that of physician observers (using manual outlining) for volume measurements of liver tumors visualized with diagnostic contrast-enhanced and PET/CT-based non-contrast-enhanced (PET-CT) CT scans. The method assessed is a hybridization of the watershed method using observer-set markers with a gradient vector flow approach. This method is known as the iterative watershed segmentation (IWS) method. Initial assessments are performed using software phantoms that model a range of tumor shapes, noise levels, and noise qualities. IWS is then applied to CT image sets of patients with identified hepatic tumors and compared to the physicians' manual outlines on the same tumors. The repeatability of the physicians' measurements is also assessed. IWS utilizes multiple levels of segmentation performed with the use of "fuzzy regions" that could be considered part of a selected tumor. In phantom studies, the outermost volume outline for level 1 (called level 1_1 consisting of inner region plus fuzzy region) was generally the most accurate. For in vivo studies, the level 1_1 and the second outermost outline for level 2 (called level 2_2 consisting of inner region plus two fuzzy regions) typically had the smallest percent error values when compared to physician observer volume estimates. Our data indicate that allowing the operator to choose the "best result" level iteration outline from all generated outlines would likely give the more accurate volume for a given tumor rather than automatically choosing a particular level iteration outline. The preliminary in vivo results indicate that 2D-IWS is likely to be more accurate than 3D-IWS in relation to the observer volume estimates.
引用
收藏
页码:5869 / 5881
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A comparison between the two-dimensional and three-dimensional lattices
    Dolocan, A
    Dolocan, VO
    Dolocan, V
    MODERN PHYSICS LETTERS B, 2004, 18 (25): : 1301 - 1309
  • [2] A comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional analyses of facial motion
    Gross, MM
    Trotman, CA
    Moffatt, KS
    ANGLE ORTHODONTIST, 1996, 66 (03) : 189 - 194
  • [3] Comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional laparoscopic video systems
    McDougall, EM
    Soble, JJ
    Wolf, JS
    Nakada, SY
    Elashry, OM
    Clayman, RV
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 1996, 10 (04) : 371 - 374
  • [4] Comparison Between Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Dynamic Stall
    Kaufmann, K.
    Gardner, A. D.
    Costes, M.
    NEW RESULTS IN NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL FLUID MECHANICS X, 2016, 132 : 315 - 325
  • [5] Comparison of Characterization in Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Canine Mammary Gland Tumor Cell Models
    Osaki, Tomohiro
    Sunden, Yuji
    Warita, Katsuhiko
    Okamoto, Yoshiharu
    YONAGO ACTA MEDICA, 2023, 66 (01) : 7 - 18
  • [6] Semiautomatic three-dimensional segmentation of the prostate using two-dimensional ultrasound images
    Wang, YQ
    Cardinal, HN
    Downey, DB
    Fenster, A
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2003, 30 (05) : 887 - 897
  • [7] A Comparison Between the Accuracy of Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Strain Measurements
    Desai, Niranjan
    Poling, Joel
    Fischer, Gregor
    Georgakis, Christos
    JOURNAL OF NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION, DIAGNOSTICS AND PROGNOSTICS OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS, 2018, 1 (02):
  • [8] Comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional thoracoscopic segmentectomy in lung cancer
    Shen, Ming-Sheng
    Hsieh, Ming-Yu
    Lin, Ching-Hsiung
    Wang, Bing-Yen
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2023, 46 (07) : 2657 - 2661
  • [9] Evaluation of gallbladder motility: comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional ultrasonography
    Stads, Susanne
    Venneman, Niels G.
    Scheffer, Robert C. H.
    Samsorn, Melvin
    van Erpecum, Karel J.
    ANNALS OF HEPATOLOGY, 2007, 6 (03) : 164 - 169
  • [10] Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional imaging in the case of oncological patients
    Voth, M
    Opfermann, T
    Käpplinger, S
    Gottschild, D
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2001, 28 (08): : 1078 - 1078