1 / 49

Centerline detection of (cardiac) vessels in CT images Martin Korevaar

Centerline detection of (cardiac) vessels in CT images Martin Korevaar. Supervisors: Shengjun Wang Han van Triest Yan Kang Bart ter Haar Romenij. Overview. Introduction Method Feature space Minimal Cost Path (MCP) search Results Conclusion Discussion. Introduction.

Download Presentation

Centerline detection of (cardiac) vessels in CT images Martin Korevaar

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Centerline detection of (cardiac) vessels in CT imagesMartin Korevaar Supervisors: Shengjun Wang Han van Triest Yan Kang Bart ter Haar Romenij

  2. Overview • Introduction • Method • Feature space • Minimal Cost Path (MCP) search • Results • Conclusion • Discussion

  3. Introduction • Coronary artery and heart diseases are one of the main causes of death in Western world • Therefore improvement of diagnosis, prevention and treatment is needed • Diagnosis is improved by techniques like CTA and MRA • CAD is needed to analyze huge amount of data

  4. Introduction • Centerline of vessel is interesting feature for CAD • Needed e.g. for CPR and lumen size measurements • Should be • Independent of vessel segmentation • Robust with respect to image degradations.

  5. CPR • Visualization method Images from: Armin Kanitsar in IEEE Viz. 2002 Okt

  6. CPR • Visualization method • Maps 3D path on 2D image Images adapted from: Armin Kanitsar in IEEE Viz. 2002 Okt

  7. CPR • Visualization method • Maps 3D path on 2D image • Artery can be investigated from just 1 image

  8. CPR • Visualization method • Maps 3D path on 2D image • Artery can be investigated from just 1 image • Centerline needs to be correct Images from: Armin Kanitsar in IEEE Viz. 2002 Okt

  9. Algorithm Create feature space Feature space with: • Center of vessel lower value then peripheryof vessel • Vessel lower value then background Find Minimum Cost Path with Dijkstra’s algorithm

  10. Feature space • Filter based on eigenvalues of Hessian

  11. Dxx*G(x,y,) G(x,y,) Dyy*G(x,y,) Dxy*G(x,y,) Hessian (1) • Matrix with all second order derivatives2D Hessian: • Derivative of image:Convolve derivative of Gaussian with image • Gaussian:

  12. 1v1 2v2 Hessian (2)Eigenvectors / -values • 1< 2(<3) • measure of curvature • i relates to vi • v2 points to max. curvature • v1 points to min. curvature, perpendicular to v1 • Rate of change of intensity is curvature of an image

  13. Hessian (2)Eigenvectors / -values 3v3 Eigenvalue of Hessian of a pixel gives information about the local structure (e.g. tube) 2v2 1v1

  14. Tubular structure filter Frangi Distinguishes blob-like structures, cannot distinguish between plate and line-like structures Distinguishes between line and plate-like structures Filters noise.

  15. Tubular structure filters Frangi Wink et al. α = β = 0.5 and c = 0.25 Max[Greyvalue] Olabarriagaet al. α = 1, β = 0.1 and c > 100 => better discrimination center / periphery vessel Chapman et al. α = 0.5, β = ∞ and c > 0.25 Max[Greyvalue] => drops RB-term => better discrimination vessel / background

  16. Tubular structure filters HessDiff Better discrimination background / vessel

  17. Tubular structure filters • Hessian is calculated at multiscale (2.6    18.6) • Scale with highest response is scale of a voxel • Highest response is in center vessel • Hessian is scaled with 2

  18. Algorithm Create feature space Feature space with: • Center of vessel lower value then peripheryof vessel • Vessel lower value then background Find Minimum Cost Path with Dijkstra’s algorithm

  19. Invert pixel values(1/pixelvalue) • Response highest at center of the vessel. • Minimal cost path needs lowest • Pixel values are inverted 1 / I

  20. Minimal cost path • Select start and end point • Find minimal cost path in between • Dijkstra’s algorithm to find that minimal cost path

  21. Dijkstra 2a 4 5 5 2 End 7 6 3 7 7 6 1 Begin 7 5 6 10 20 3

  22. Dijkstra 2b Find min neighbours (green) Add it to investigated nodes (red). Remember predecessor . 4 5 5 2 (1) [6] . . 7 6 3 7 7 6 1 7 5 (1) [7] . 6 8 20 3 (1) [8]

  23. Dijkstra 2c Add neighbours (green) Remember predecessor . . 4 4 (2) [11] 4 5 5 2 (1) [6] 2 (1) . 7 6 3 3 7 7 7 6 1 7 5 5 (1) [7] . 6 8 20 3 (1) [8]

  24. Dijkstra 2d Find min neighbours (green) Add it to investigated nodes (red). Remember predecessor . . 4 (2) [11] 4 5 5 2 (1) [6] 2 (1) . 7 6 3 3 7 7 7 1 6 7 5 (1) [7] . 6 8 20 3 (1) [8]

  25. Dijkstra 2e • Add neighbours (green) • Remember predecessor Update predecessor and cost if node already in neighbours . . . 4 (5) [10] 4 5 5 2 (1) [6] 2 (1) . 7 (5) [13] 7 6 3 3 7 7 7 1 6 7 5 5 (1) 5 (1) [7] . 6 8 20 3 (1) [8]

  26. Dijkstra 2f Find min neighbours (green) Add it to investigated nodes (red). Remember predecessor . . . 4 (5) [10] 4 5 5 2 (1) [6] 2 (1) . 7 (5) [13] 7 5 3 3 7 7 7 1 6 7 5 5 (1) 5 (1) [7] . 6 8 20 3 (1) [8]

  27. Dijkstra 2g Add neighbours (green) Remember predecessor . . . 4 (5) [10] 4 5 5 2 (1) [6] 2 (1) . 7 (5) [13] 7 6 3 3 7 7 . 7 1 6 7 5 (1) [7] 5 5 (1) . 6 (3) [28] 8 20 3 (1) [8]

  28. Dijkstra 2h Find min neighbours (green) Add it to investigated nodes (red). Remember predecessor . . . 4 (5) [10] 4 5 5 2 (1) [6] 2 (1) . 7 (5) [13] 6 3 3 7 7 . 7 1 6 7 5 (1) [7] 5 5 (1) . 6 (3) [28] 8 20 3 3 (1) [8]

  29. Dijkstra 2i . Goal! . . 4 (5) [10] 4 (5) 5 5 2 (1) [6] 2 (1) . 7 7 (5) [13] 6 3 3 7 7 . 7 1 6 7 5 (1) [7] 5 5 (1) . 6 (4) [17] 8 20 3 (1) [8] 3

  30. Dijkstra 2i . Backtrack: 7 => 5 => 1 . . 4 (5) [10] 4 (5) 5 5 2 (1) [6] 2 (1) . . 7 7 (5) [13] 6 3 3 7 7 . 7 1 6 7 5 5 (1) [7] 5 (1) . 6 (4) [17] 8 20 3 3 (1) [8]

  31. Minimal cost path Defined cost: V(i) is the voxel value a is weight factor i is ith voxel of the path

  32. Minimal cost path Defined cost: V(i) is the voxel value a is weight factor i is ith voxel of the path Higher values of a => Relative difference between center and surrounding increases => Will follow minimum better instead of shortest path

  33. Algorithm Calculate response to (Frangi’s) filter Get Eigenvalues of the Hessian Matrix Invert pixel values (1/pixelvalue) Find minimum cost path with dijkstra’s algorithm

  34. Experiments • Original method on different datasets • On worst performing dataset • a = 1 • a = 5 • Different filters • Frangi with different parameters • Wink • Olabarriaga • Chapman • HessDiff

  35. Result (CPR) 3 Datasets (1) LAD (2) RCx (3) LAD

  36. Different filters and cost functions (CPR) Proximal part Wink a=1 Wink a=5 Chapman a=1 Chapman a=5

  37. Different filters and cost functions (CPR) Proximal part Olabarriagaa=5 Olabarriaga a=1

  38. Olabarriaga (a=5) Wink (a=5) Different filters: Wink and Olabarriaga Sagittal slice at the stenosis Frangi’s filter with Wink’s constants Frangi’s filter with Olabarriaga‘s constants

  39. Different filters: Wink and Olabarriaga Sagittal slice heart wall

  40. Different filters and cost functions (CPR) Proximal part HessDiff a=1

  41. Different filters: HessDiff Low response at stenosis Lot of false positives Strong false positives at the heart wall Response CT

  42. Different filters and cost functions Distal part a=1 a= 5 a=1 a= 5 a=1 a= 5 a=1 a= 5 Chapman Wink Olabarriaga HessDiff

  43. Different filters Doesn’t follow vessel at heart wall Wink Grey Olabarriaga Chapman HessDiff

  44. Multiscale Wink • Vessel response at low scale • Heart wall response at high scale • Heart wall response is stronger σ= 2.6 σ= 6 σ= 10 σ= 16 σ= All Grey value

  45. Different cost function a=1 and a=5 a=1 • α = 5 vs. α =1 • Investigates nodes in smaller area • Less computations • More able to follow local minima • Less able to pass local maxima (stenosis)

  46. Discussion • Used scales were high (2.6    18.6) • High responses of the heart wall => bad centerline extraction • HessDiff and Olabarriaga track the centerline badly: • Low response at stenosis. • HessDiff lot of false positive response • Wink and Chapman track the centerline excellent.

  47. Conclusion • The centerline is tracked in most cases (more or less) accurate • Wink and Chapman are best filters. • They can even coop with a stenosis. • It returns to the center even if it gets outside the vessel (robust) • Different cost functions yield different results: • High power more precise in details and faster. • Low power more robust and slower.

  48. Further research • Smaller scales might improve results • Use Wink’s constants

  49. Questions?

More Related