4.7 Article

Cardiac Phase Detection in Echocardiograms With Densely Gated Recurrent Neural Networks and Global Extrema Loss

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING
Volume 38, Issue 8, Pages 1821-1832

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2018.2888807

Keywords

Deep residual neural networks; densely-connected networks; recurrent neural networks; long short term memory; gated recurrent unit; bi-directional RNN; echocardiography; cardiac cycle phase detection

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accurate detection of end-systolic (ES) and end-diastolic (ED) frames in an echocardiographic cine series can be difficult but necessary pre-processing step for the development of automatic systems to measure cardiac parameters. The detection task is challenging due to variations in cardiac anatomy and heart rate often associated with pathological conditions. We formulate this problem as a regression problem and propose several deep learning-based architectures that minimize a novel global extrema structured loss function to localize the ED and ES frames. The proposed architectures integrate convolution neural networks (CNNs)-based image feature extraction model and recurrent neural networks (RNNs) to model temporal dependencies between each frame in a sequence. We explore two CNN architectures: DenseNet and ResNet, and four RNN architectures: long short-term memory, bi-directional LSTM, gated recurrent unit (GRU), and Bi-GRU, and compare the performance of these models. The optimal deep learning model consists of a DenseNet and GRU trained with the proposed loss function. On average, we achieved 0.20 and 1.43 frame mismatch for the ED and ES frames, respectively, which are within reported inter-observer variability for the manual detection of these frames.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available