Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performance Evaluation of Lung Segmentation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Medical Imaging Technology

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Bioengineering ((LNBE))

Abstract

Segmentation of structures in medical images is challenging due to several factors which include anatomical differences, abnormalities in lung tissue, image noise, and differences in acquisition parameters. Segmentation is one of the key initial components of Computer Aided Diagnosis (CAD) system. Radiologists deal with a heavy workload of having to examine a large number of high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) images. CAD-based systems can lighten their load. and also aiding them as a tool in their diagnostic evaluations. The development of CAD and hence the automatic segmentation is aggressively pursued by researchers worldwide. Therefore it is important to determine the performance or the quality of the automated segmentation developed. Here in this chapter, different segmentation performance evaluation methods for medical images are presented. For most segmentation evaluations, it is important to have comparison done with the gold standard. The gold standard for segmentation involving medical images is the delineation or manual tracing of the region of interest done by a human expert who is preferably a radiologist. The smaller the deviation of the segmentation compared to the human expert, the higher the performance or the quality of the segmentation. The performance evaluation for the segmentation is divided into quantitative and qualitative methods. Most quantitative methods fall into two categories which are area based evaluation methods where the difference between the areas of segmentation and the gold standard are compared, and surface evaluation type where the method evaluates based on the difference between contours of the segmentation and the gold standard. This chapter also discussed a performance evaluation of an automated lung segmentation systems (ALSS) developed by UTM Razak School. This chapter shows the vast performance measures available for determining the segmentation quality. More than one type of performance measure should be used to give a broader and unbiased view of the segmentation quality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. van Rikxoort EM, van Ginneken B (2013) Automated segmentation of pulmonary structures in thoracic computed tomography scans: a review. Phys Med Biol 58(17):R187–R220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hu S, Hoffman EA, Reinhardt JM (2001) Automatic lung segmentation for accurate quantitation of volumetric X-ray CT images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 20(6):490–498

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dehmeshki J, Amin H, Valdivieso M, Ye X (2008) Segmentation of pulmonary nodules in thoracic CT scans: a region growing approach. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 27(4):467–480

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kuhnigk JM, Hahn H, Hindennach M, Dicken V, Krass S, Peitgen HO (2003) Lung lobe segmentation by anatomy-guided 3D watershed transform. Proc SPIE 4(1):1482–1490

    Google Scholar 

  5. Shojaii R, Alirezaie J, Babyn P (2005) Automatic lung segmentation in CT images using watershed transform. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on image processing, ICIP 2005, vol 2, II–1270–1273

    Google Scholar 

  6. Osareh A, Shadgar B (2010) A segmentation method of lung cavities using region aided geometric snakes. J Med Syst 34(4):419–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Massoptier L, Misra A, Sowmya A (2009) Automatic lung segmentation in HRCT images with diffuse parenchymal lung disease using graph-cut. In: Proceedings of the 24th international conference on image and vision computing New Zealand, IVCNZ’09, pp 266–270

    Google Scholar 

  8. van Rikxoort EM, de Hoop B, Viergever MA, Prokop M, van Ginneken B (2009) Automatic lung segmentation from thoracic computed tomography scans using a hybrid approach with error detection. Med Phys 36(7):2934–2947

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sluimer I, Prokop M, van Ginneken B (2005) Toward automated segmentation of the pathological lung in CT. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 24(8):1025–1038

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nagaraj S, Rao GN, Koteswararao K (2010) The role of pattern recognition in computer-aided diagnosis and computer-aided detection in medical imaging: a clinical validation. Int J Comput Appl 8(5):18–22

    Google Scholar 

  11. Krupinski EA, Berbaum KS (2010) Does reader visual fatigue impact interpretation accuracy? Proc SPIE 7627:76270M

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Doi K (2007) Computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging: historical review, current status and future potential. Comput Med Imaging Graph 31:198–211

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kobayashi T, Xu X-W, MacMahon H, Metz CE, Doi K (1996) Effect of a computer-aided diagnosis scheme on radiologists’ performance in detection of lung nodules on radiographs. Radiology 199(3):843–848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jaccard P (1908) Nouvelles recherches sur la distribution florale. Bull Soc Vaudoise Sci Nat 44:223–270

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ruskó L, Bekes G, Fidrich M (2009) Automatic segmentation of the liver from multi- and single-phase contrast-enhanced CT images. Med Image Anal 13(6):871–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Martin Bland J, Altman D (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 327(8476):307–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Antoniou KM, Nicholson AG, Dimadi M, Malagari K, Latsi P, Rapti A, Tzanakis N, Trigidou R, Polychronopoulos V, Bouros D (2006) Long-term clinical effects of interferon gamma-1b and colchicine in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Eur Respir J 28(3):496–504

    Google Scholar 

  18. Otsu N (1979) A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. Syst Man Cybern IEEE Trans 9(1):62–66

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Heimann T, van Ginneken B, Styner MA, Arzhaeva Y, Aurich V, Bauer C, Beck A, Becker C, Beichel R, Bekes G, Bello F, Binnig G, Bischof H, Bornik A, Cashman PMM, Chi Y, Cordova A, Dawant BM, Fidrich M, Furst JD, Furukawa D, Grenacher L, Hornegger J, Kainmüller D, Kitney RI, Kobatake H, Lamecker H, Lange T, Lee J, Lennon B, Li R, Li S, Meinzer H-P, Nemeth G, Raicu DS, Rau A-M, van Rikxoort EM, Rousson M, Rusko L, Saddi KA, Schmidt G, Seghers D, Shimizu A, Slagmolen P, Sorantin E, Soza G, Susomboon R, Waite JM, Wimmer A, Wolf I (2009) Comparison and evaluation of methods for liver segmentation from CT datasets. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 28(8):1251–1265

    Google Scholar 

  20. Boykov Y, Kolmogorov V (2004) An experimental comparison of min-cut/max-flow algorithms for energy minimization in vision. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 26(9):1124–1137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Alberola-López C, Martín-Fernández M, Ruiz-Alzola J (2004) Comments on: a methodology for evaluation of boundary detection algorithms on medical images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 23(5):658–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pope A (2009) Reproducibility: intraobserver and interobserver variability. Biostatistics for radiologists. Springer, Berlin, pp 125–140

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UTM Razak School of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM Kuala Lumpur Campus, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Norliza Mohd Noor & Joel Chia Ming Than

  2. Institute of Mathematical Sciences Faculty of Science, University of Malaya, Lembah Pantai, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Omar Mohd Rijal

Authors
  1. Norliza Mohd Noor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joel Chia Ming Than
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Omar Mohd Rijal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Norliza Mohd Noor .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Biomedical Engineering, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Khin Wee Lai

  2. IJN-UTM Cardiovascular Engineering Centr, University Technology Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia

    Dyah Ekashanti Octorina Dewi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Noor, N.M., Than, J.C.M., Rijal, O.M. (2015). Performance Evaluation of Lung Segmentation. In: Lai, K., Octorina Dewi, D. (eds) Medical Imaging Technology. Lecture Notes in Bioengineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-540-2_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-540-2_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-287-539-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-287-540-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation