4.5 Article

Contour-aware multi-label chest X-ray organ segmentation

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11548-019-02115-9

关键词

Image segmentation; Convolutional neural networks; Deep learning architectures; Chest X-ray (CXR) images; JSRT database

资金

  1. Russian Science Foundation [18-71-10072] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Segmentation of organs from chest X-ray images is an essential task for an accurate and reliable diagnosis of lung diseases and chest organ morphometry. In this study, we investigated the benefits of augmenting state-of-the-art deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for image segmentation with organ contour information and evaluated the performance of such augmentation on segmentation of lung fields, heart, and clavicles from chest X-ray images. Methods Three state-of-the-art CNNs were augmented, namely the UNet and LinkNet architecture with the ResNeXt feature extraction backbone, and the Tiramisu architecture with the DenseNet. All CNN architectures were trained on ground-truth segmentation masks and additionally on the corresponding contours. The contribution of such contour-based augmentation was evaluated against the contour-free architectures, and 20 existing algorithms for lung field segmentation. Results The proposed contour-aware segmentation improved the segmentation performance, and when compared against existing algorithms on the same publicly available database of 247 chest X-ray images, the UNet architecture with the ResNeXt50 encoder combined with the contour-aware approach resulted in the best overall segmentation performance, achieving a Jaccard overlap coefficient of 0.971, 0.933, and 0.903 for the lung fields, heart, and clavicles, respectively. Conclusion In this study, we proposed to augment CNN architectures for CXR segmentation with organ contour information and were able to significantly improve segmentation accuracy and outperform all existing solution using a public chest X-ray database.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据