4.7 Article

Computer-aided detection of cerebral microbleeds in susceptibility-weighted imaging

期刊

COMPUTERIZED MEDICAL IMAGING AND GRAPHICS
卷 46, 期 -, 页码 269-276

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compmedimag.2015.10.001

关键词

Cerebral microbleed; Susceptibility-weighted imaging; Radon transform; Multi-scale Laplacian of Gaussian; Random forests

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) is recognized as the preferred MRI technique for visualizing cerebral vasculature and related pathologies such as cerebral microbleeds (CMBs). Manual identification of CMBs is time-consuming, has limited reliability and reproducibility, and is prone to misinterpretation. In this paper, a novel computer-aided microbleed detection technique based on machine learning is presented: First, spherical-like objects (potential CMB candidates) with their corresponding bounding boxes were detected using a novel multi-scale Laplacian of Gaussian technique. A set of robust 3-dimensional Radon- and Hessian-based shape descriptors within each bounding box were then extracted to train a cascade of binary random forests (RF). The cascade consists of consecutive independent RF classifiers with low to high posterior probability constraints to handle imbalanced training sets (CMBs and non-CMBs), and to progressively improve detection rates. The proposed method was validated on 66 subjects whose CMBs were manually stratified into possible and definite by two medical experts. The proposed technique achieved a sensitivity of 87% and an average false detection rate of 27.1 CMBs per subject on the possible and definite set. A sensitivity of 93% and false detection rate of 10 CMBs per subject was also achieved on the definite set. The proposed automated approach outperforms state of the art methods, and promises to enhance manual expert screening. Benefits include improved reliability, minimization of intra-rater variability and a reduction in assessment time. (c) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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