We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
Dynamic multiple thresholding breast boundary detection algorithm for mammograms.
- Authors
Yi-Ta Wu; Chuan Zhou; Heang-Ping Chan; Paramagul, Chintana; Hadjiiski, Lubomir M.; Daly, Caroline Plowden; Douglas, Julie A.; Yiheng Zhang; Sahiner, Berkman; Jiazheng Shi; Jun Wei
- Abstract
Purpose: Automated detection of breast boundary is one of the fundamental steps for computer-aided analysis of mammograms. In this study, the authors developed a new dynamic multiple thresholding based breast boundary (MTBB) detection method for digitized mammograms. Methods: A large data set of 716 screen-film mammograms (442 CC view and 274 MLO view) obtained from consecutive cases of an Institutional Review Board approved project were used. An experienced breast radiologist manually traced the breast boundary on each digitized image using a graphical interface to provide a reference standard. The initial breast boundary (MTBB-Initial) was obtained by dynamically adapting the threshold to the gray level range in local regions of the breast periphery. The initial breast boundary was then refined by using gradient information from horizontal and vertical Sobel filtering to obtain the final breast boundary (MTBB-Final). The accuracy of the breast boundary detection algorithm was evaluated by comparison with the reference standard using three performance metrics: The Hausdorff distance (HDist), the average minimum Euclidean distance (AMinDist), and the area overlap measure (AOM). Results: In comparison with the authors’ previously developed gradient-based breast boundary (GBB) algorithm, it was found that 68%, 85%, and 94% of images had HDist errors less than 6 pixels (4.8 mm) for GBB, MTBB-Initial, and MTBB-Final, respectively. 89%, 90%, and 96% of images had AMinDist errors less than 1.5 pixels (1.2 mm) for GBB, MTBB-Initial, and MTBB-Final, respectively. 96%, 98%, and 99% of images had AOM values larger than 0.9 for GBB, MTBB-Initial, and MTBB-Final, respectively. The improvement by the MTBB-Final method was statistically significant for all the evaluation measures by the Wilcoxon signed rank test (p<0.0001). Conclusions: The MTBB approach that combined dynamic multiple thresholding and gradient information provided better performance than the breast boundary detection algorithm that mainly used gradient information.
- Subjects
MAMMOGRAMS; BREAST exams; ALGORITHMS; HUMAN anatomy; MEDICAL physics
- Publication
Medical Physics, 2010, Vol 37, Issue 1, p391
- ISSN
0094-2405
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1118/1.3273062