Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
NSF MedIX REU Program Medical Imaging Projects @ DePaul CDM Daniela S. Raicu, PhD Associate Professor Email: [email protected] Lab URL: http://facweb.cs.depaul.edu/research/vc/ Outline Medical Imaging (Computed Tomography) – Content-based and semantic-based image retrieval • Projects 1 and 2 – Mappings from low-level image features to semantic concepts • Projects 3 and 4 – Liver segmentation • Project 5 NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Content-based medical image retrieval (CBMS) systems Definition of Content-based Image Retrieval: Content-based image retrieval is a technique for retrieving images on the basis of automatically derived image features such as texture and shape. - Applications of Content-based Image Retrieval: • Teaching • Research • Diagnosis • PACS and Electronic Patient Records NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Diagram of a CBIR Image Database Image Features Feature Extraction [D1, D2,…Dn] Similarity Retrieval Query Image Feedback Algorithm User Evaluation NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Query Results CBIR as a Diagnosis Aid An image retrieval system can help when the diagnosis depends strongly on direct visual properties of images in the context of evidence-based medicine or case-based reasoning. NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University CBIR as a Teaching Tool An image retrieval system will allow students/teachers to browse available data themselves in an easy and straightforward fashion by clicking on “show me similar images”. Advantages: - stimulate self-learning and a comparison of similar cases - find optimal cases for teaching Teaching files: • Casimage: http://www.casimage.com • myPACS: http://www.mypacs.net NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University CBIR as a Research Tool Image retrieval systems can be used: • to complement text-based retrieval methods • for visual knowledge management whereby the images and associated textual data can be analyzed together • multimedia data mining can be applied to learn the unknown links between visual features and diagnosis or other patient information • for quality control to find images that might have been misclassified NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University CBIR as a tool for lookup and reference in CT chest/abdomen • Case Study: lung nodules retrieval – Lung Imaging Database Resource for Imaging Research http://imaging.cancer.gov/programsandresources/Inf ormationSystems/LIDC/page7 – 29 cases, 5,756 DICOM images/slices, 1,143 nodule images – 4 radiologists annotated the images using 9 nodule characteristics: calcification, internal structure, lobulation, malignancy, margin, sphericity, spiculation, subtlety, and texture • Goals: – Retrieve nodules based on image features: • Texture, Shape, and Size – Find the correlations between the image features and the radiologists’ annotations NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University LIDC Semantic Concepts Calcification 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Popcorn Laminated Solid Non-central Central Absent Sphericity 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Linear . Ovoid . Round Internal structure 1. 2. 3. 4. Soft Tissue Fluid Fat Air Spiculation 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Marked . . . None Lobulation 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Marked . . . None Subtlety 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Extremely Subtle Moderately Subtle Fairly Subtle Moderately Obvious Obvious Malignancy 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Highly Unlikely Moderately Unlikely Indeterminate Moderately Suspicious Highly Suspicious Texture 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Non-Solid . Part Solid/(Mixed) . Solid Margin 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Poorly Defined . . . Sharp NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Extracted Image Features Shape Features Size Features Intensity Features Circularity Area MinIntensity Roughness ConvexArea MaxIntensity Elongation Perimeter MeanIntensity Compactness ConvexPerimeter SDIntensity Eccentricity EquivDiameter MinIntensityBG Solidity MajorAxisLength MaxIntensityBG Extent MinorAxisLength MeanIntensityBG RadialDistanceSD SDIntensityBG IntensityDifference NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Texture Features 11 Haralick features calculated from cooccurrence matrices (Contrast, Correlation, Entropy, Energy, Homogeneity, 3rd Order Moment, Inverse Differential Moment, Variance, Sum Average, Cluster Tendency, Maximum Probability) 24 Gabor features - mean and standard deviation of Gabor filters consistency of four orientations and three scales. Lung nodule representation NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Choose a nodule NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Choose an image feature& a similarity measure NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Retrieved Images CBIR systems: challenges & REU projects •Type of features • image features: - texture features: statistical, structural, model and filter-based - shape features • textual features (such as physician annotations) Project 1: Feature reduction for medical image processing - Investigate how many features with respect to the number of unique nodules - Investigate what the most important low-level image features are with respect to the retrieval process - Investigate the uniformity of the features with respect to the same type of nodules. NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University CBIR systems: challenges & REU projects (cont.) •Similarity measures -point-based and distribution based metrics • Retrieval performance: • precision and recall • clinical evaluation Project 2: Evaluation of CBIR and SBIR systems • • • Perform a literature review on the current techniques used to evaluate CBIR systems both for the general and medical domain Investigate ways to include radiologists’ feedback in the retrieval process Investigate ways to evaluate the retrieval process by varying various numbers of parameters such as number of images retrieved, cutoff value for acceptable precision and recall, and minimum number of radiologists/observers needed to evaluate the system. NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Correlations between Image Features and Concepts Characteristics Image Features Lobulation 0.65 Spiculation -0.42, -0.42, 0.34, 0.30 Eccentricity, Elongation, Extent, Circularity Margin Sphericity 0.62 Malignancy 0.47 Subtlety 0.48, 0.48, 0.48, 0.47, 0.47, 0.47, 0.46 0.52, 0.52, 0.52, 0.53, 0.51, 0.51, 0.49 Texture InternalStructure Calcification NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Area, ConvexArea, EquivDiameter, MinorAxisLength, ConvexPerimeter, Perimeter, MajorAxisLength Automatic Mappings Extraction Step-wise multiple regression analysis was applied to generate prediction models for each characteristic ci based on all image features fk: M i : ci 0 k 1, p k fk i where p is the # of used image features, k are the regression coefficients, and i are the prediction errors per model. Goodness of fit for the regression model: adj _ R 1 1 R 2 2 n 1 n p 1 NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Regression Models Characteristics Calcification Entire dataset (1106 images, 73 nodules) At least 2 radiologists agreed At least 3 radiologists agreed 0.397 0.578 (884, 41) 0.645 (644, 21) 0.417 - (855, 40) - (659, 22) Lobulation 0.282 0.559 (448, 24) 0.877 (137, 6) Malignancy 0.310 0.641 (489, 23) 0.990 (107, 5) 0.403 0.376 (519, 28) - (245, 7) Sphericity 0.239 0.481 (575, 27) 0.682 (207, 9) Spiculation 0.320 0.563 (621, 29) 0.840 (228, 9) Subtlety 0.301 0.282 (659, 25) 0.491 (360, 10) Texture 0.181 0.473 (736, 33) 0.843 (437, 15) Internal Structure Margin NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Texture Regression Model NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Malignancy Regression Model Characteristics Calcification InternalStructure Lobulation Adj_R2 = 0.990 M alignancy M argin Sphericity F-value = 963.560 p-value = 0.000 (Co nstan t) Gabormean_4 5¼ _0.5 M inIn tensity BG En ergy Gabormean_0¼ _0.4 In tesityDifference In verseVariance Gabormean_4 5¼ _0.4 Gabormean_9 0¼ _0.4 Co rrelation ClusterT endency Co nv exPerimeter Re gression Coe fficients p-valu e 5.3 77 27 5 -0.0 20 69 0.0 03 81 9 -2 8.5 31 4 -0.0 03 15 0.0 00 27 2 6.3 17 13 3 0.0 09 74 3 -0.0 06 67 -0.3 91 83 5.1 6E-0 6 -0.0 02 91 1.6 4E-5 4 7.8 0E-0 7 3.3 0E-8 2 3.3 1E-1 2 5.8 0E-1 4 0.0 03 60 9 3.4 1E-0 5 0.0 00 25 9 5.7 9E-0 5 5.6 7E-0 5 0.0 00 13 1 0.0 23 03 2 Spiculation Subtlety Texture Estimated M alignancy = 5.3 77 27 5- 0.0 20 69Gabormean_4 5¼_0.5 + 0.0 03 81 9M inIn tensity BG - 2 8.5 31 4En ergy - 0.0 03 15Gabormean_0¼_0.4 + 0.0 00 27 2In tesityDifference+ 6.3 17 13 3In verseVariance + 0.0 09 74 3Gabormean_4 5¼_0.4 - 0.0 06 67Gabormean_9 0¼ _0.4 - 0.3 91 83Co rrelation+ 5.1 6E-0 6 ClusterT endency - 0.0 02 91Co nv exPerimeter NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Lobulation Regression Model NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Spiculation Regression Model NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Image Features – Semantics Mappings: challenges & REU projects Project 3: Multi-view learning classifier for lung nodule classification • Investigate which image features are the best for individual semantic characteristics, build classifiers for each one of the individual classifiers, and combine the individual classifies for optimal learning/classification of lung nodules Project 4: Bridging the semantic gap in lung nodule interpretation • • Investigate ways to clinically evaluate the mappings from low-level image features to semantic characteristics Investigate the effect of the imaging acquisition parameters (such as pitch, FOV, and reconstruction kernel) on the proposed mappings NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Liver Segmentation in CT images Pixel-level Classification: - tissue segmentation - context-sensitive tools for radiology reporting - Pixel Level Texture Extraction d1 , d 2 , d k Pixel Level Classification tissue _ label NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Organ Segmentation Liver Segmentation in CT images Example of Liver Segmentation: (J.D. Furst, R. Susomboon, and D.S. Raicu, "Single Organ Segmentation Filters for Multiple Organ Segmentation", IEEE 2006 International Conference of the Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBS'06)) Original Image Initial Seed at 90% Split & Merge at 85% Split & Merge at 80% Region growing at 70% Region growing at 60% Segmentation Result NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University Liver Segmentation using Automatic Snake a) a) b) c) d) Figure: a) Gradient vector flow segmentation; b) Traditional vector field segmentation; c) and,d) Respective segmentations overlaid on ground truth (white). Project 5: Automatic selection of initial points for snakebased segmentation NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University uestions ? NSF MedIX REU Program, CDM, DePaul University