Medical imaging analysis with artificial neural networks

Given that neural networks have been widely reported in the research community of medical imaging, we provide a focused literature survey on recent neural network developments in computer-aided diagnosis, medical image segmentation and edge detection towards visual content analysis, and medical image registration for its pre-processing and post-processing, with the aims of increasing awareness of how neural networks can be applied to these areas and to provide a foundation for further research and practical development. Representative techniques and algorithms are explained in detail to provide inspiring examples illustrating: (i) how a known neural network with fixed structure and training procedure could be applied to resolve a medical imaging problem; (ii) how medical images could be analysed, processed, and characterised by neural networks; and (iii) how neural networks could be expanded further to resolve problems relevant to medical imaging. In the concluding section, a highlight of comparisons among many neural network applications is included to provide a global view on computational intelligence with neural networks in medical imaging

Automatic Autism Spectrum Disorder Detection Using Artificial Intelligence Methods with MRI Neuroimaging: A Review

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a brain condition characterized by diverse signs and symptoms that appear in early childhood. ASD is also associated with communication deficits and repetitive behavior in affected individuals. Various ASD detection methods have been developed, including neuroimaging modalities and psychological tests. Among these methods, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging modalities are of paramount importance to physicians. Clinicians rely on MRI modalities to diagnose ASD accurately. The MRI modalities are non-invasive methods that include functional (fMRI) and structural (sMRI) neuroimaging methods. However, the process of diagnosing ASD with fMRI and sMRI for specialists is often laborious and time-consuming; therefore, several computer-aided design systems (CADS) based on artificial intelligence (AI) have been developed to assist the specialist physicians. Conventional machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) are the most popular schemes of AI used for diagnosing ASD. This study aims to review the automated detection of ASD using AI. We review several CADS that have been developed using ML techniques for the automated diagnosis of ASD using MRI modalities. There has been very limited work on the use of DL techniques to develop automated diagnostic models for ASD. A summary of the studies developed using DL is provided in the appendix. Then, the challenges encountered during the automated diagnosis of ASD using MRI and AI techniques are described in detail. Additionally, a graphical comparison of studies using ML and DL to diagnose ASD automatically is discussed. We conclude by suggesting future approaches to detecting ASDs using AI techniques and MRI neuroimaging

Detecting microcalcification clusters in digital mammograms: Study for inclusion into computer aided diagnostic prompting system

Among signs of breast cancer encountered in digital mammograms radiologists point to microcalcification clusters (MCCs). Their detection is a challenging problem from both medical and image processing point of views. This work presents two concurrent methods for MCC detection, and studies their possible inclusion to a computer aided diagnostic prompting system. One considers Wavelet Domain Hidden Markov Tree (WHMT) for modeling microcalcification edges. The model is used for differentiation between MC and non-MC edges based on the weighted maximum likelihood (WML) values. The classification of objects is carried out using spatial filters. The second method employs SUSAN edge detector in the spatial domain for mammogram segmentation. Classification of objects as calcifications is carried out using another set of spatial filters and Feedforward Neural Network (NN). A same distance filter is employed in both methods to find true clusters. The analysis of two methods is performed on 54 image regions from the mammograms selected randomly from DDSM database, including benign and cancerous cases as well as cases which can be classified as hard cases from both radiologists and the computer perspectives. WHMT/WML is able to detect 98.15% true positive (TP) MCCs under 1.85% of false positives (FP), whereas the SUSAN/NN method achieves 94.44% of TP at the cost of 1.85% for FP. The comparison of these two methods suggests WHMT/WML for the computer aided diagnostic prompting. It also certifies the low false positive rates for both methods, meaning less biopsy tests per patient