Percutaneous coronary intervention is a treatment for coronary artery disease, which is performed under image-guidance using X-ray angiography. The intensities in an X-ray image are a superimposition of 2D structures projected from 3D anatomical structures, which makes robust information processing challenging. The purpose of this work is to investigate to what extent vessel layer separation can be achieved with deep learning, especially adversarial networks. To this end, we develop and evaluate a deep learning based method for vessel layer separation. In particular, the method utilizes a fully convolutional network (FCN), which was trained by two different strategies: an \(L_1\) loss and a combination of \(L_1\) and adversarial losses. The experiment results show that the FCN trained with both losses can well enhance vessel structures by separating the vessel layer, while the \(L_1\) loss results in better contrast. In contrast to traditional layer separation methods [1], both our methods can be executed much faster and thus have potential for real-time applications.


  1. 1.
    Ma, H.: Automatic online layer separation for vessel enhancement in X-ray angiograms for percutaneous coronary interventions. Med. Image Anal. 39, 145–161 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ma, H., et al.: Layer separation for vessel enhancement in interventional X-ray angiograms using morphological filtering and robust PCA. In: Linte, C.A., Yaniv, Z., Fallavollita, P. (eds.) AE-CAI 2015. LNCS, vol. 9365, pp. 104–113. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Litjens, G.: A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Med. Image Anal. 42, 60–88 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hao, H., et al.: Vessel layer separation in X-ray angiograms with fully convolutional network. In: Proceedings of SPIE 10576, Medical Imaging 2018: Image-Guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, and Modeling (2018)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., Brox, T.: U-Net: convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In: Navab, N., Hornegger, J., Wells, W.M., Frangi, A.F. (eds.) MICCAI 2015, Part III. LNCS, vol. 9351, pp. 234–241. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goodfellow, I., et al.: Generative adversarial nets. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 2672–2680 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nie, D., et al.: Medical image synthesis with context-aware generative adversarial networks. In: Descoteaux, M., et al. (eds.) MICCAI 2017, Part III. LNCS, vol. 10435, pp. 417–425. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wolterink, J.M.: Generative adversarial networks for noise reduction in low-dose CT. IEEE TMI 36(12), 2536–2545 (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ioffe, S., Szegedy, C.: Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.03167 (2015)
  10. 10.
    Isola, P., et al.: Image-to-image translation with conditional adversarial networks. In: CVPR (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang, Z.: Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 13(4), 600–612 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kingma, D., Ba, J.: ADAM: a method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014)

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EEMCSDelft University of TechnologyDelftNetherlands
  2. 2.Biomedical Imaging Group RotterdamErasmus MCRotterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations