Assessment of image features for vessel wall segmentation in intravascular ultrasound images

  • Lucas Lo VercioEmail author
  • José Ignacio Orlando
  • Mariana del Fresno
  • Ignacio Larrabide
Original Article



Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) provides axial greyscale images, allowing the assessment of the vessel wall and the surrounding tissues. Several studies have described automatic segmentation of the luminal boundary and the media–adventitia interface by means of different image features.


The aim of the present study is to evaluate the capability of some of the most relevant state-of-the-art image features for segmenting IVUS images. The study is focused on Volcano 20 MHz frames not containing plaque or containing fibrotic plaques, and, in principle, it could not be applied to frames containing shadows, calcified plaques, bifurcations and side vessels.


Several image filters, textural descriptors, edge detectors, noise and spatial measures were taken into account. The assessment is based on classification techniques previously used for IVUS segmentation, assigning to each pixel a continuous likelihood value obtained using support vector machines (SVMs). To retrieve relevant features, sequential feature selection was performed guided by the area under the precision–recall curve (AUC-PR).


Subsets of relevant image features for lumen, plaque and surrounding tissues characterization were obtained, and SVMs trained with these features were able to accurately identify those regions. The experimental results were evaluated with respect to ground truth segmentations from a publicly available dataset, reaching values of AUC-PR up to 0.97 and Jaccard index close to 0.85.


Noise-reduction filters and Haralick’s textural features denoted their relevance to identify lumen and background. Laws’ textural features, local binary patterns, Gabor filters and edge detectors had less relevance in the selection process.


IVUS Vessel wall Segmentation Feature selection SVM 



The present work has been partially funded by the National Agency for Science and Technology Promotion (ANPCyT, Argentina) within the projects PICT 2010-1287 and PICT 2014-1730.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest.


  1. 1.
    Aja-Fernández S, Alberola-Lopez C (2006) On the estimation of the coefficient of variation for anisotropic diffusion speckle filtering. IEEE Trans Image Process 15(9):2694–2701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alberti M, Balocco S, Gatta C, Ciompi F, Pujol O, Silva J, Carrillo X, Radeva P (2012) Automatic bifurcation detection in coronary IVUS sequences. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 59(4):1022–1031CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alpaydin E (2010) Introduction to machine learning, 2nd edn. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balocco S, Gatta C, Ciompi F, Wahle A, Radeva P, Carlier S, Unal G, Sanidas E, Mauri J, Carillo X, Kovarnik T, Wang CW, Chen HC, Exarchos TP, Fotiadis DI, Destrempes F, Cloutier G, Pujol O, Alberti M, Mendizabal-Ruiz EG, Rivera M, Aksoy T, Downe RW, Kakadiaris IA (2014) Standardized evaluation methodology and reference database for evaluating IVUS image segmentation. Comput Med Imaging Graph 38(2):70–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bovik A, Clark M, Geisler W (1990) Multichannel texture analysis using localized spatial filters. Pattern Anal Mach Intell IEEE Trans 12(1):55–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caballero K, Barajas J, Pujol O, Rodriguez O, Radeva P (2007) Using reconstructed IVUS images for coronary plaque classification. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBS 2007. 29th annual international conference of the IEEE, pp 2167–2170Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ciompi F (2008) Ecoc-based plaque classification using in-vivo and ex-vivo intravascular ultrasound data. Master’s thesis, CVC-UABGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ciompi F, Pujol O, Gatta C, Alberti M, S B, Carrillo X, Mauri-Ferre J, Radeva P (2012) Holimab: a holistic approach for mediaadventitia border detection in intravascular ultrasound. Med Image Anal 16:1085–1100Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crimmins TR (1985) Geometric filter for speckle reduction. Appl Opt 24(10):1438–1443CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Giannoglou V, Stavrakoudis D, Theocharis J (2012) IVUS-based characterization of atherosclerotic plaques using feature selection and svm classification. In: 2012 IEEE 12th international conference on bioinformatics bioengineering (BIBE), pp 715–720Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giannoglou VG, Stavrakoudis DG, Theocharis JB, Petridis V (2015) Genetic fuzzy rule based classification systems for coronary plaque characterization based on intravascular ultrasound images. Eng Appl Artif Intell 38:203–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gil D, Hernandez A, Rodriguez O, Mauri J, Radeva P (2006) Statistical strategy for anisotropic adventitia modelling in IVUS. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 25(6):768–778CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haralick R, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I (1973) Textural features for image classification. Syst Man Cybern IEEE Trans SMC 3(6):610–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2009) The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jourdain M, Meunier J, Sequeira J, Cloutier G, Tardif JC (2010) Intravascular ultrasound image segmentation: a helical active contour method. In: Image processing theory tools and applications (IPTA), 2010 2nd international conference on, pp 92–97Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Katouzian A, Angelini E, Carlier S, Suri J, Navab N, Laine A (2012) A state-of-the-art review on segmentation algorithms in intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) images. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 16(5):823–834CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Koga T, Uchino E, Suetake N (2011) Automated boundary extraction and visualization system for coronary plaque in IVUS image by using fuzzy inference-based method. In: 2011 IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ), pp 1966–1973Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu Y, Shriberg E (2007) Comparing evaluation metrics for sentence boundary detection. In: Acoustics, speech and signal processing, ICASSP 2007. IEEE international conference on, vol 4, pp IV-185–IV-188Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Loizou C, Pattichis C (2008) Despeckle filtering algorithms and software for ultrasound imaging. Morgan and Claypool, San RafaelGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mendizabal-Ruiz EG, Rivera M, Kakadiaris IA (2013) Segmentation of the luminal border in intravascular ultrasound b-mode images using a probabilistic approach. Med Image Anal 17(6):649–670CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moreland K (2009) Diverging color maps for scientific visualization. In: Bebis G, Boyle R, Parvin B, Koracin D, Kuno Y, Wang J, Pajarola R, Lindstrom P, Hinkenjann A, Encarnao ML, Silva CT, Coming D (eds) Advances in visual computing. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 5876. Springer, Berlin, pp 92–103Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nissen SE, Yock P (2001) Intravascular ultrasound: novel pathophysiological insights and current clinical applications. Circulation 103(4):604–616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ojala T, Pietikainen M, Maenpaa T (2002) Multiresolution gray-scale and rotation invariant texture classification with local binary patterns. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 24(7):971–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Perona P, Malik J (1990) Scale-space and edge detection using anisotropic diffusion. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 12(7):629–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pujol O, Rosales M, Radeva P, Nofrerias-Fernández E (2003) Intravascular ultrasound images vessel characterization using adaboost. In: Magnin I, Montagnat J, Clarysse P, Nenonen J, Katila T (eds) Functional imaging and modeling of the heart. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2674. Springer, Berlin, pp 242–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sanz-Requena R, Moratal D, García-Sánchez DR, Bodí V, Rieta JJ, Sanchis JM (2007) Automatic segmentation and 3D reconstruction of intravascular ultrasound images for a fast preliminar evaluation of vessel pathologies. Comput Med Imaging Graph 31(2):71–80CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shalev-Shwartz S, Zhang T (2013) Stochastic dual coordinate ascent methods for regularized loss. J Mach Learn Res 14(1):567–599Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shapiro R, Haralick R (1992) Computer and robot vision. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Taki A, Najafi Z, Roodaki A, Setarehdan S, Zoroofi R, Konig A, Navab N (2008) Automatic segmentation of calcified plaques and vessel borders in IVUS images. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 3(3–4):347–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Unal G, Bucher S, Carlier S, Slabaugh G, Fang T, Tanaka K (2008) Shape-driven segmentation of the arterial wall in intravascular ultrasound images. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 12(3):335–347CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vedaldi A, Fulkerson B (2008) VLFeat: an open and portable library of computer vision algorithms.
  32. 32.
    Yu L, Liu H (2004) Efficient feature selection via analysis of relevance and redundancy. J Mach Learn Res 5:1205–1224Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yu Y, Acton S (2002) Speckle reducing anisotropic diffusion. IEEE Trans Image Process 11(11):1260–1270CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zhu X, Zhang P, Shao J, Cheng Y, Zhang Y, Bai J (2011) A snake-based method for segmentation of intravascular ultrasound images and its in vivo validation. Ultrasonics 51(2):181–189CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lucas Lo Vercio
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • José Ignacio Orlando
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mariana del Fresno
    • 1
    • 3
  • Ignacio Larrabide
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Pladema, UNICENTandilArgentina
  2. 2.CONICETTandilArgentina
  3. 3.CIC-PBATandilArgentina

Personalised recommendations