Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Development and application of a segmentation routine in a mammographic mass CAD system
Author(s): David Mark Catarious; Alan H. Baydush; Carey E. Floyd
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to present a new segmentation routine developed for mammographic masses. We previously developed a computer-aided detection (CAD) system for mammographic masses that employed a simple but imprecise segmentation procedure. To improve the systems performance, an iterative, linear segmentation routine was developed. The routine begins by employing a linear discriminant function to determine the optimal threshold between estimates of an objects interior and exterior pixels. After applying the threshold and identifying the objects outline, two constraints are applied to minimize the influence of extraneous background structures. Each iteration further refines the outline until the stopping criterion is reached. The segmentation algorithm was tested on a database of 181 mammographic images that contained forty-nine malignant and fifty benign masses. A set of suspicious regions of interest (ROIs) was found using the previous CAD system. Twenty features were measured from the regions before and after applying the new segmentation routine. The difference in the features discriminatory ability was examined via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. A significant performance difference was observed in many features, particularly those describing the object border. Free-response ROC (FROC) curves were utilized to examine how the overall CAD system performance changed with the inclusion of the segmentation routine. The FROC performance appeared to be improved, especially for malignant masses. When detecting 90% of the malignant masses, the previous system achieved 4.4 false positives per image (FPpI) compared to the post-segmentation systems 3.7 FPpI. At 85%, the respective FPpI are 4.1 and 2.1.

Paper Details

Date Published: 12 May 2004
PDF: 9 pages
Proc. SPIE 5370, Medical Imaging 2004: Image Processing, (12 May 2004); doi: 10.1117/12.536177
Show Author Affiliations
David Mark Catarious, Duke Univ. (United States)
Alan H. Baydush, Duke Univ. Medical Ctr. (United States)
Carey E. Floyd, Duke Univ. Medical Ctr. (United States)
Duke Univ. (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 5370:
Medical Imaging 2004: Image Processing
J. Michael Fitzpatrick; Milan Sonka, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top