3 research outputs found

    MI-SegNet: Mutual Information-Based US Segmentation for Unseen Domain Generalization

    Full text link
    Generalization capabilities of learning-based medical image segmentation across domains are currently limited by the performance degradation caused by the domain shift, particularly for ultrasound (US) imaging. The quality of US images heavily relies on carefully tuned acoustic parameters, which vary across sonographers, machines, and settings. To improve the generalizability on US images across domains, we propose MI-SegNet, a novel mutual information (MI) based framework to explicitly disentangle the anatomical and domain feature representations; therefore, robust domain-independent segmentation can be expected. Two encoders are employed to extract the relevant features for the disentanglement. The segmentation only uses the anatomical feature map for its prediction. In order to force the encoders to learn meaningful feature representations a cross-reconstruction method is used during training. Transformations, specific to either domain or anatomy are applied to guide the encoders in their respective feature extraction task. Additionally, any MI present in both feature maps is punished to further promote separate feature spaces. We validate the generalizability of the proposed domain-independent segmentation approach on several datasets with varying parameters and machines. Furthermore, we demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed MI-SegNet serving as a pre-trained model by comparing it with state-of-the-art networks.Comment: Accepted by MICCAI 202

    Carotid Ultrasound Boundary Study (CUBS): An Open Multicenter Analysis of Computerized Intima–Media Thickness Measurement Systems and Their Clinical Impact

    Get PDF
    [Abstract] Common carotid intima–media thickness (CIMT) is a commonly used marker for atherosclerosis and is often computed in carotid ultrasound images. An analysis of different computerized techniques for CIMT measurement and their clinical impacts on the same patient data set is lacking. Here we compared and assessed five computerized CIMT algorithms against three expert analysts’ manual measurements on a data set of 1088 patients from two centers. Inter- and intra-observer variability was assessed, and the computerized CIMT values were compared with those manually obtained. The CIMT measurements were used to assess the correlation with clinical parameters, cardiovascular event prediction through a generalized linear model and the Kaplan–Meier hazard ratio. CIMT measurements obtained with a skilled analyst's segmentation and the computerized segmentation were comparable in statistical analyses, suggesting they can be used interchangeably for CIMT quantification and clinical outcome investigation. To facilitate future studies, the entire data set used is made publicly available for the community at http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/fpv535fss7.
    corecore