Volume 34, Issue 11 p. 4399-4408
Radiation imaging physics

Automated volume analysis of head and neck lesions on CT scans using 3D level set segmentation

Ethan Street

Ethan Street

Department of Radiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0904

Search for more papers by this author
Lubomir Hadjiiski

Lubomir Hadjiiski

Department of Radiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0904

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Telephone: (734) 647-7428; Fax: (734) 615-5513. Electronic mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Berkman Sahiner

Berkman Sahiner

Department of Radiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0904

Search for more papers by this author
Sachin Gujar

Sachin Gujar

Department of Radiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0904

Search for more papers by this author
Mohannad Ibrahim

Mohannad Ibrahim

Department of Radiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0904

Search for more papers by this author
Suresh K. Mukherji

Suresh K. Mukherji

Department of Radiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0904

Search for more papers by this author
Heang-Ping Chan

Heang-Ping Chan

Department of Radiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0904

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 24 October 2007
Citations: 36

Abstract

The authors have developed a semiautomatic system for segmentation of a diverse set of lesions in head and neck CT scans. The system takes as input an approximate bounding box, and uses a multistage level set to perform the final segmentation. A data set consisting of 69 lesions marked on 33 scans from 23 patients was used to evaluate the performance of the system. The contours from automatic segmentation were compared to both 2D and 3D gold standard contours manually drawn by three experienced radiologists. Three performance metric measures were used for the comparison. In addition, a radiologist provided quality ratings on a 1 to 10 scale for all of the automatic segmentations. For this pilot study, the authors observed that the differences between the automatic and gold standard contours were larger than the interobserver differences. However, the system performed comparably to the radiologists, achieving an average area intersection ratio of urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp4174:mp4174-math-0001 compared to an average of urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp4174:mp4174-math-0002 between two radiologists. The average absolute area error was urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp4174:mp4174-math-0003 compared to urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp4174:mp4174-math-0004, and the average 2D distance was 1.38 mm compared to 0.84 mm between the radiologists. In addition, the quality rating data showed that, despite the very lax assumptions made on the lesion characteristics in designing the system, the automatic contours approximated many of the lesions very well.