Premium
Automated segmentation of cerebral vasculature with aneurysms in 3DRA and TOF‐MRA using geodesic active regions: An evaluation study
Author(s) -
Bogunović Hrvoje,
Pozo José María,
VillaUriol María Cruz,
Majoie Charles B. L. M.,
van den Berg Rene,
Gratama van Andel Hugo A. F.,
Macho Juan M.,
Blasco Jordi,
San Román Luis,
Frangi Alejandro F.
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.3515749
Subject(s) - geodesic , segmentation , artificial intelligence , computer vision , computer science , medical imaging , image segmentation , radiology , medicine , mathematics , geometry
Purpose: To evaluate the suitability of an improved version of an automatic segmentation method based on geodesic active regions (GAR) for segmenting cerebral vasculature with aneurysms from 3D x‐ray reconstruction angiography (3DRA) and time of flight magnetic resonance angiography (TOF‐MRA) images available in the clinical routine. Methods: Three aspects of the GAR method have been improved: execution time, robustness to variability in imaging protocols, and robustness to variability in image spatial resolutions. The improved GAR was retrospectively evaluated on images from patients containing intracranial aneurysms in the area of the Circle of Willis and imaged with two modalities: 3DRA and TOF‐MRA. Images were obtained from two clinical centers, each using different imaging equipment. Evaluation included qualitative and quantitative analyses of the segmentation results on 20 images from 10 patients. The gold standard was built from 660 cross‐sections (33 per image) of vessels and aneurysms, manually measured by interventional neuroradiologists. GAR has also been compared to an interactive segmentation method: isointensity surface extraction (ISE). In addition, since patients had been imaged with the two modalities, we performed an intermodality agreement analysis with respect to both the manual measurements and each of the two segmentation methods. Results: Both GAR and ISE differed from the gold standard within acceptable limits compared to the imaging resolution. GAR (ISE) had an average accuracy of 0.20 (0.24) mm for 3DRA and 0.27 (0.30) mm for TOF‐MRA, and had a repeatability of 0.05 (0.20) mm. Compared to ISE, GAR had a lower qualitative error in the vessel region and a lower quantitative error in the aneurysm region. The repeatability of GAR was superior to manual measurements and ISE. The intermodality agreement was similar between GAR and the manual measurements. Conclusions: The improved GAR method outperformed ISE qualitatively as well as quantitatively and is suitable for segmenting 3DRA and TOF‐MRA images from clinical routine.