kth.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Using simulated breast lesions based on Perlin noise for evaluation of lesion segmentation
Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
KTH, School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health (CBH), Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, Medical Imaging.
Medical Radiation Physics, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2024 (English)In: Medical Imaging 2024: Physics of Medical Imaging, SPIE-Intl Soc Optical Eng , 2024, article id 129251PConference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Segmentation of diagnostic radiography images using deep learning is progressively expanding, which sets demands on the accessibility, availability, and accuracy of the software tools used. This study aimed at evaluating the performance of a segmentation model for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), with the use of computer-simulated breast anatomy. We have simulated breast anatomy and soft tissue breast lesions, by utilizing a model approach based on the Perlin noise algorithm. The obtained breast phantoms were projected and reconstructed into DBT slices using a publicly available open-source reconstruction method. Each lesion was then segmented using two approaches: 1. the Segment Anything Model (SAM), a publicly available AI-based method for image segmentation and 2. manually by three human observers. The lesion area in each slice was compared to the ground truth area, derived from the binary mask of the lesion model. We found similar performance between SAM and manual segmentation. Both SAM and the observers performed comparably in the central slice (mean absolute relative error compared to the ground truth and standard deviation SAM: 4 ± 3 %, observers: 3 ± 3 %). Similarly, both SAM and the observers overestimated the lesion area in the peripheral reconstructed slices (mean absolute relative error and standard deviation SAM: 277 ± 190 %, observers: 295 ± 182 %). We showed that 3D voxel phantoms can be used for evaluating different segmentation methods. In preliminary comparison, tumor segmentation in simulated DBT images using SAM open-source method showed a similar performance as manual tumor segmentation.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
SPIE-Intl Soc Optical Eng , 2024. article id 129251P
Keywords [en]
AI, Breast phantom, computer simulations and VCT, segmentation
National Category
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-347131DOI: 10.1117/12.3008840ISI: 001223517100049Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85193540163OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-347131DiVA, id: diva2:1864380
Conference
Medical Imaging 2024: Physics of Medical Imaging, San Diego, United States of America, Feb 19 2024 - Feb 22 2024
Note

Part of ISBN 9781510671546

QC 20240610

Available from: 2024-06-03 Created: 2024-06-03 Last updated: 2024-06-14Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Yang, ZhikaiMoreno, RodrigoSmedby, Örjan

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Yang, ZhikaiMoreno, RodrigoSmedby, Örjan
By organisation
Medical Imaging
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 90 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf