Automated Fractured Bone Segmentation and Labeling from CT Images

  • Darshan D. RuikarEmail author
  • K. C. SantoshEmail author
  • Ravindra S. Hegadi
Image & Signal Processing
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Image & Signal Processing


Within the scope of education and training, automatic and accurate segmentation of fractured bones from Computed Tomographic (CT) images is the fundamental step in several different applications, such as trauma analysis, visualization, diagnosis, surgical planning and simulation. It helps physicians analyze the severity of injury by taking into account the following fracture features, such as location of the fracture, number of pieces and deviation from the original location. Besides, it helps provide accurate 3D visualization and decide optimal recovery plans/processes. To accurately segment fracture bones from CT images, in the paper, we introduce a segmentation technique that makes labeling process easier. Based on the patient-specific anatomy, unique labels are assigned. Unlike conventional techniques, it also includes the removal of unwanted artifacts, such as flesh. In our experiments, we have demonstrated our concept with real-world data (with an accuracy of 95.45%) and have compared with state-of-the-art techniques. For validation, our tests followed expert-based decisions i.e., clinical ground-truth. With the results, our collection of 8000 CT images will be available upon the request.


CT images Fractured bones Contrast stretching Histogram modeling Connected component Segmentation Hierarchical structured labeling 



Authors thank the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), New Delhi for granting Visvesvaraya Ph.D. fellowship through file no. PhD-MLA ∖ 4(34) ∖ 201-1 Dated: 05/11/2015. The first author would like to thank Dr. Jamma and Dr. Jagtap for providing expert guidance on bone anatomy. Along with this, he also would like to thank, Prism Medical Diagnostics lab, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Sarvopachar Ruganalay and Ashwini Hospital for providing patient-specific CT images.

Funding Information

The study was partially funded by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), New Delhi for granting Visvesvaraya Ph.D. fellowship through file no. PhD-MLA ∖ 4(34) ∖ 201-1 Dated: 05/11/2015.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interests

Authors declared no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.


  1. 1.
    Chan, T.F., Sandberg, B.Y., and Vese, L.A., Active contours without edges for vector-valued images. J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent. 11(2):130–141, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Egol, K.A., Koval, K.J., and Zuckerman, J.D., Handbook of fractures. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2010.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fornaro, J., Székely, G., and Harders, M.: Semi-automatic segmentation of fractured pelvic bones for surgical planning. In: International symposium on biomedical simulation, pp. 82–89. Springer, 2010.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gangwar, T., Calder, J., Takahashi, T., Bechtold, J.E., and Schillinger, D., Robust variational segmentation of 3D bone CT data with thin cartilage interfaces. Med. Image Anal. 47:95–110, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gonzalez, R.C., and Woods, R.E.: Digital Image Process, 2012Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harders, M., Barlit, A., Gerber, C., Hodler, J., and Székely, G.: An optimized surgical planning environment for complex proximal humerus fractures. In: MICCAI workshop on interaction in medical image analysis and visualization, Vol. 30, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    He, Y., Shi, C., Liu, J., and Shi, D.: A segmentation algorithm of the cortex bone and trabecular bone in proximal humerus based on CT images. In: 2017 23rd international conference on automation and computing (ICAC), pp. 1–4. IEEE, 2017.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hounsfield, G.N., Computed medical imaging. Medical Phys. 7(4):283–290, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang, C.Y., Luo, L.J., Lee, P.Y., Lai, J.Y., Wang, W.T., Lin, S.C., et al., Efficient segmentation algorithm for 3D bone models construction on medical images. J. Med. Biol. Eng. 31:375–386, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hunter, E.J., and Palaparthi, A.K.R.: Removing patient information from MRI and CT images using MATLAB. National Repository for Laryngeal Data Technical Memo No. 3(version 2.0), 1–4, 2015Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Justice, R.K., Stokely, E.M., Strobel, J.S., Ideker, R.E., and Smith, W.M.: Medical image segmentation using 3D seeded region growing. In: International society for optics and photonics, medical imaging 1997: Image processing, Vol. 3034, pp. 900–911, 1997.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaminsky, J., Klinge, P., Rodt, T., Bokemeyer, M., Luedemann, W., and Samii, M., Specially adapted interactive tools for an improved 3D-segmentation of the spine. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 28(3):119–127, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lai, J.Y., Essomba, T., Lee, P.Y., et al.: Algorithm for segmentation and reduction of fractured bones in computer-aided preoperative surgery. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on biomedical and bioinformatics engineering, pp. 12–18. ACM, 2016.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee, P.Y., Lai, J.Y., Hu, Y.S., Huang, C.Y., Tsai, Y.C., and Ueng, W.D., Virtual 3D planning of pelvic fracture reduction and implant placement. Biomed. Eng.: Appl. Basis Commun. 24(03):245–262, 2012.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moghari, M.H., and Abolmaesumi, P.: Global registration of multiple bone fragments using statistical atlas models: feasibility experiments. In: 2008 30th annual international conference of the IEEE, engineering in medicine and biology society, 2008. EMBS, pp. 5374–5377. IEEE, 2008.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paulano, F., Jiménez, J.J., and Pulido, R., 3D segmentation and labeling of fractured bone from CT images. Vis. Comput. 30(6-8):939–948, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pham, D.L., Xu, C., and Prince, J.L., Current methods in medical image segmentation. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2(1):315–337, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Poleti, M.L., Fernandes, T.M.F., Pagin, O., Moretti, M.R., and Rubira-Bullen, I.R.F., Analysis of linear measurements on 3D surface models using CBCT data segmentation obtained by automatic standard pre-set thresholds in two segmentation software programs: an in vitro study. Clin. Oral Investig. 20(1):179–185, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ruikar, D.D., Hegadi, R.S., and Santosh, K., A systematic review on orthopedic simulators for psycho-motor skill and surgical procedure training. J. Med. Syst. 42(9):168, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sachse, F.B.: 5. digital image processing. In: Computational cardiology, pp. 91–118. Springer, 2004.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sebastian, T.B., Tek, H., Crisco, J.J., Wolfe, S.W., and Kimia, B.B.: Segmentation of carpal bones from 3D ct images using skeletally coupled deformable models. In: International conference on medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention, pp. 1184–1194. Springer, 1998.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shadid, W., and Willis, A.: Bone fragment segmentation from 3D CT imagery using the probabilistic watershed transform. In: 2013 Proceedings of IEEE southeastcon, pp. 1–8. IEEE, 2013.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shadid, W.G., and Willis, A., Bone fragment segmentation from 3D CT imagery. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 66:14–27, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Szymor, P., Kozakiewicz, M., and Olszewski, R., Accuracy of open-source software segmentation and paper-based printed three-dimensional models. J. Cranio-Maxillofac. Surg. 44(2):202–209, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tassani, S., Matsopoulos, G.K., and Baruffaldi, F., 3D identification of trabecular bone fracture zone using an automatic image registration scheme: A validation study. J. Biomechanics 45(11):2035–2040, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Testi, D., Quadrani, P., and Viceconti, M., Physiomespace: digital library service for biomedical data. Philosophical Trans. Royal Soc. London A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 368(1921):2853–2861, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tomazevic, M., Kreuh, D., Kristan, A., Puketa, V., and Cimerman, M.: Preoperative planning program tool in treatment of articular fractures: process of segmentation procedure. In: XII Mediterranean conference on medical and biological engineering and computing 2010, pp. 430–433. Springer, 2010.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vasilache, S., and Najarian, K.: Automated bone segmentation from pelvic CT images. In: IEEE international conference on bioinformatics and biomeidcine workshops, 2008. BIBMW 2008. pp. 41–47. IEEE, 2008.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceSolapur UniversitySolapurIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceThe University of South DakotaVermillionUSA

Personalised recommendations