Biolab, Department of Electronics, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 10129 Torino, Italy.
Med Phys. 2012 Jan;39(1):378-91. doi: 10.1118/1.3670373.
The development of completely automated techniques for arterial wall segmentation and intima-media thickness measurement requires the recognition of the artery in the image frame. Conceptually, automated techniques can be thought of as the combination of two cascaded stages: artery recognition and wall segmentation. In this paper, the authors show three carotid artery recognition systems (CARS) that are fully automated.
The first technique is based on a first-order derivative Gaussian edge analysis (CARSgd). The second method is based on an integrated approach (CARSia) that combines image feature extraction, fitting, and classification. The third strategy is based on signal analysis (CARSsa). The output of all the three paradigms provide tracing of the far adventitial (AD(F)). The authors validated CARSgd, CARSia, and CARSsa on a dataset of 365 longitudinal B-Mode carotid images, acquired by different sonographers. Performance evaluation of the carotid recognition process was done in three ways: (1) visual inspection by experts; (2) by measuring the Hausdorff distance (HD) between the automatic far adventitial (AD(F)) and the manually traced AD(F), and (3) by measuring the HD between AD(F) and the lumen-intima (GT(LI)) and media-adventitia (GT(MA)) borders of the arterial walls.
The average HD between AD(F) and the manual AD(F) was 1.53 ± 1.51 mm for CARSgd, 1.82 ± 3.08 mm for CARSia, and 2.56 ± 2.89 mm for CARSsa. The average HD between GT(LI) and AD(F) for CARSgd, CARSia, and CARSsa were 2.16 ± 1.16 mm, 2.71 ± 2.89 mm, and 2.66 ± 1.52 mm, respectively. The average HD between AD(F) and GT(MA) for CARSgd, CARSia, and CARSsa were 1.54 ± 1.19 mm, 1.86 ± 2.66 mm, and 1.95 ± 1.64 mm, respectively. Considering a maximum distance of 50 pixels (about 3 mm), CARSgd showed an identification accuracy of 100%, CARSia of 92%, and CARSsa of 96%. These identification accuracies were confirmed by visual inspection. All the three systems work on MATLAB, Windows OS, and on a PC based cross platform medical application written in Java called ATHEROEDGE™ with 1 s per image.
CARSgd showed very accurate AD(F) profiles coupled with a low computational burden and without the need for specific tuning. It can be thought of as a reference technique for carotid localization, to be used in automated intima-media thickness measurement strategies.
完全自动化的动脉壁分割和内膜中层厚度测量技术的发展需要识别图像帧中的动脉。从概念上讲,自动化技术可以被认为是两个级联阶段的组合:动脉识别和壁分割。在本文中,作者展示了三种完全自动化的颈动脉识别系统(CARS)。
第一种技术基于一阶导数高斯边缘分析(CARSgd)。第二种方法基于一种综合方法(CARSia),该方法结合了图像特征提取、拟合和分类。第三种策略基于信号分析(CARSsa)。所有三种范例的输出都提供了远外膜(AD(F))的跟踪。作者在由不同超声医生采集的 365 个纵向 B 模式颈动脉图像数据集上验证了 CARSgd、CARSia 和 CARSsa。颈动脉识别过程的性能评估采用三种方法进行:(1)专家进行视觉检查;(2)通过测量自动远外膜(AD(F))和手动跟踪的 AD(F)之间的 Hausdorff 距离(HD),以及(3)通过测量 AD(F)和管腔内膜(GT(LI))之间的 HD 和动脉壁的中膜-外膜(GT(MA))边界。
对于 CARSgd,AD(F)和手动 AD(F)之间的平均 HD 为 1.53±1.51mm,对于 CARSia,为 1.82±3.08mm,对于 CARSsa,为 2.56±2.89mm。对于 CARSgd、CARSia 和 CARSsa,GT(LI)和 AD(F)之间的平均 HD 分别为 2.16±1.16mm、2.71±2.89mm 和 2.66±1.52mm。对于 CARSgd、CARSia 和 CARSsa,AD(F)和 GT(MA)之间的平均 HD 分别为 1.54±1.19mm、1.86±2.66mm 和 1.95±1.64mm。考虑到最大距离为 50 像素(约 3mm),CARSgd 的识别准确率为 100%,CARSia 为 92%,CARSsa 为 96%。这些识别准确率通过视觉检查得到了证实。所有三种系统都在 MATLAB、Windows 操作系统和基于 Java 的跨平台医疗应用程序 ATHEROEDGE™上运行,该程序每幅图像耗时 1 秒。
CARSgd 显示出非常准确的 AD(F)轮廓,计算负担低,无需特定调整。它可以被认为是颈动脉定位的参考技术,用于自动化内膜中层厚度测量策略。