Comparison of classification techniques for the assessment of myocardial viability by cardiac imaging with delayed MR enhancement

J. Pineda, X. Suarez, I. Aristizábal, J. E. Duque, A. Zuluaga, N. Aldana
{"title":"Comparison of classification techniques for the assessment of myocardial viability by cardiac imaging with delayed MR enhancement","authors":"J. Pineda, X. Suarez, I. Aristizábal, J. E. Duque, A. Zuluaga, N. Aldana","doi":"10.1109/STSIVA.2012.6340572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Myocardial viability is a fundamental question in clinical decision making process and in the treatment of ischemic heart disease. Contrast enhanced Magnetic Resonance can distinguish between viable and necrotic myocardium in non-invasive manner and with excellent definition of endocardial and epicardial tissue, allowing to assess the extent of necrosis. The correct classification between pathological and healthy tissue is a fundamental process for the posterior quantification and diagnosis. Using image processing theory is possible to use automatic techniques for tissue classification; however it is difficult to choose which is better. In this paper we present a semiautomatic methodology that allows the quantification of myocardial viability in MR delayed enhancement. We evaluate the accuracy and concordance of different classification algorithms comparing the results with simulated data and with the classification of expert radiologists. It was not significant differences in the Fuzzy C-means and K-means results. The threshold classification method showed high sensibility but very low agreement. We concluded that either of the centroid-based algorithms, the Fuzzy C-means or the K-means are correct for the assessment of myocardial viability.","PeriodicalId":383297,"journal":{"name":"2012 XVII Symposium of Image, Signal Processing, and Artificial Vision (STSIVA)","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2012 XVII Symposium of Image, Signal Processing, and Artificial Vision (STSIVA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/STSIVA.2012.6340572","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Myocardial viability is a fundamental question in clinical decision making process and in the treatment of ischemic heart disease. Contrast enhanced Magnetic Resonance can distinguish between viable and necrotic myocardium in non-invasive manner and with excellent definition of endocardial and epicardial tissue, allowing to assess the extent of necrosis. The correct classification between pathological and healthy tissue is a fundamental process for the posterior quantification and diagnosis. Using image processing theory is possible to use automatic techniques for tissue classification; however it is difficult to choose which is better. In this paper we present a semiautomatic methodology that allows the quantification of myocardial viability in MR delayed enhancement. We evaluate the accuracy and concordance of different classification algorithms comparing the results with simulated data and with the classification of expert radiologists. It was not significant differences in the Fuzzy C-means and K-means results. The threshold classification method showed high sensibility but very low agreement. We concluded that either of the centroid-based algorithms, the Fuzzy C-means or the K-means are correct for the assessment of myocardial viability.
延迟磁共振增强心脏成像评估心肌活力的分类技术比较
心肌活力是临床决策过程和缺血性心脏病治疗中的一个基本问题。增强磁共振造影可以以无创方式区分存活心肌和坏死心肌,并对心内膜和心外膜组织有很好的定义,可以评估坏死的程度。病理组织和健康组织的正确分类是后量化和诊断的基本过程。利用图像处理理论可以使用自动技术进行组织分类;然而,很难选择哪一个更好。在本文中,我们提出了一种半自动方法,允许定量心肌活力在磁共振延迟增强。我们将结果与模拟数据和放射科专家的分类结果进行比较,以评估不同分类算法的准确性和一致性。模糊c均值和k均值结果无显著差异。阈值分类方法灵敏度高,但一致性很低。我们得出结论,无论是基于质心的算法,模糊c均值或k均值都是正确的心肌活力评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信