Segmentation-Free Kidney Localization and Volume Estimation Using Aggregated Orthogonal Decision CNNs

  • Mohammad Arafat HussainEmail author
  • Alborz Amir-Khalili
  • Ghassan Hamarneh
  • Rafeef Abugharbieh
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10435)


Kidney volume is an important bio-marker in the clinical diagnosis of various renal diseases. For example, it plays an essential role in follow-up evaluation of kidney transplants. Most existing methods for volume estimation rely on kidney segmentation as a prerequisite step, which has various limitations such as initialization-sensitivity and computationally-expensive optimization. In this paper, we propose a hybrid localization-volume estimation deep learning approach capable of (i) localizing kidneys in abdominal CT images, and (ii) estimating renal volume without requiring segmentation. Our approach involves multiple levels of self-learning of image representation using convolutional neural layers, which we show better capture the rich and complex variability in kidney data, demonstrably outperforming hand-crafted feature representations. We validate our method on clinical data of 100 patients with a total of 200 kidney samples (left and right). Our results demonstrate a 55% increase in kidney boundary localization accuracy, and a 30% increase in volume estimation accuracy compared to recent state-of-the-art methods deploying regression-forest-based learning for the same tasks.



We thank Dr. Timothy W. O’Connell and Dr. Mohammed F. Mohammed at VGH for providing the data and ground truth kidney tracing.


  1. 1.
    Arora, P., Vasa, P., Brenner, D., Iglar, K., McFarlane, P., Morrison, H., Badawi, A.: Prevalence estimates of CKD in Canada: results of a nationally representative survey. Canadian Med. Assoc. Jour. 185(9), E417–E423 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Honeycutt, A.A., Segel, J.E., Zhuo, X., Hoerger, T.J., Imai, K., Williams, D.: Medical costs of CKD in the Medicare population. J. Am. Soc. Nephro. 24(9), 1478–1483 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Connolly, J.O., Woolfson, R.G.: A critique of clinical guidelines for detection of individuals with chronic kidney disease. Neph. Clin. Pract. 111(1), c69–c73 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hussain, M.A., Hamarneh, G., O’Connell, T.W., Mohammed, M.F., Abugharbieh, R.: Segmentation-free estimation of kidney volumes in CT with dual regression forests. In: Wang, L., Adeli, E., Wang, Q., Shi, Y., Suk, H.-I. (eds.) MLMI 2016. LNCS, vol. 10019, pp. 156–163. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-47157-0_19 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Criminisi, A., Shotton, J., Robertson, D., Konukoglu, E.: Regression forests for efficient anatomy detection and localization in CT studies. In: Menze, B., Langs, G., Tu, Z., Criminisi, A. (eds.) MCV 2010. LNCS, vol. 6533, pp. 106–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-18421-5_11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Criminisi, A., Robertson, D., Konukoglu, E., Shotton, J., Pathak, S., White, S., Siddiqui, K.: Regression forests for efficient anatomy detection and localization in computed tomography scans. Med. Image Ana. 17(8), 1293–1303 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cuingnet, R., Prevost, R., Lesage, D., Cohen, L.D., Mory, B., Ardon, R.: Automatic detection and segmentation of kidneys in 3D CT images using random forests. In: Ayache, N., Delingette, H., Golland, P., Mori, K. (eds.) MICCAI 2012. LNCS, vol. 7512, pp. 66–74. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-33454-2_9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lu, X., Xu, D., Liu, D.: Robust 3D Organ Localization with Dual Learning Architectures and Fusion. In: International Workshop on Large-Scale Annotation of Biomedical Data Expert Label Synthesis, pp. 12–20 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yang, G., Gu, J., Chen, Y., Liu, W., Tang, L., Shu, H., Toumoulin, C.: Automatic kidney segmentation in CT images based on multi-atlas image registration. In: IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology, pp. 5538–5541 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jia, Y., E., Donahue, J., Karayev, S., Long, J., Girshick, R., Guadarrama, S., Darrell, T.: Caffe: Convolutional architecture for fast feature embedding. In: ACM International Conference on Multimodal, pp. 675–678 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zakhari, N., Blew, B., Shabana, W.: Simplified method to measure renal volume: the best correction factor for the ellipsoid formula volume calculation in pretransplant CT live donor. Urology 83(6), 1444.e15–1444.e19 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhen, X., Wang, Z., Islam, A., Bhaduri, M., Chan, I., Li, S.: Direct estimation of cardiac Bi-ventricular volumes with regression forests. In: Golland, P., Hata, N., Barillot, C., Hornegger, J., Howe, R. (eds.) MICCAI 2014. LNCS, vol. 8674, pp. 586–593. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-10470-6_73 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wan, X., Wang, W., Liu, J., Tong, T.: Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med. Res. Meth. 14(1), 135 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Arafat Hussain
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alborz Amir-Khalili
    • 1
  • Ghassan Hamarneh
    • 2
  • Rafeef Abugharbieh
    • 1
  1. 1.BiSICLUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Medical Image Analysis LabSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations