Problems Related to Automatic Nipple Extraction

  • Christina Olsén
  • Fredrik Georgsson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3540)


Computerized analysis of mammograms can serve as a secondary opinion, improving consistency by providing a standardized approach to mammogram interpretation, and increasing detection sensitivity. However, before any computer aided mammography algorithm can be applied to the nipple, one of several important anatomical features, need to extracted. This is challenging since the contrast near the border of the breast, and thus the nipple in mammograms, is very low. Therefore, in order to develop more robust and accurate methods, it is important to restrict the search area for automatic nipple location. We propose an automatic initialization of the search area of the nipple by combining a geometrical assumptions verified against the MIAS database regarding the location of the nipple along the breast border and a geometrical model for deciding how far into the breast region the nipple can occur. In addition, the modelling reduces the need for parameters determining the search area and thus making the method more general. We also investigate the variance between the medical experts often use as ground truth when determining performance measures for developed medical methods.


Ground Truth Search Area Digital Mammography Pectoralis Muscle Digital Mammogram 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Chandrasekhar, R., Attikiouzel, Y.: A simple method for automatically locating the nipple on mammograms. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 16, 483–494 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mendez, A.J., Tahoces, P.G., Lado, M.J., Souto, M., Correa, J.L., Vidal, J.J.: Automatic detection of breast border and nipple in digital mammograms. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 49, 253–262 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Olsén, C.: Automatic breast border extraction. In: Fitzpatrick, J.M., Reinhardt, J.M. (eds.) To appear in proceedings of (SPIE) Medical Imaging (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olsén, C., Georgsson, F.: The accuracy of geometric approximation of the mamilla in mammograms. In: Lemke, H.U., Vannier, M.V., Farman, A.G., Doi, K., Reiber, J.H.C. (eds.) Computer Assisted Radiology: Proceedings of the international symposium. Excerpta Medica International Congress Series, vol. 1256, pp. 956–961. Elsevier, London (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Semmlow, J.L., Shadagopappan, A., Ackerman, L.V., Hand, W., Alcorn, F.S.: A fully automated system for screening xeromammograms. Computers and Biomedical Research 13, 350–362 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Suckling, J., Parker, J., Dance, D.R., Astley, S., Hutt, I., Boggis, C.R.M., Ricketts, I., Stamatakis, E., Cerneaz, N., Kok, S.-L., Taylor, P., Betal, D., Savage, J.: The mammographic image analysis society digital mammogram database. In: Gale, A.G., Astley, S.M., Dance, D.R., Cairns, A.Y. (eds.) Digital Mammography, pp. 375–378. Elsevier Science, The Netherlands (1994)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thurfjell, E.L., Lernevall, K.A., Taube, A.A.S.: Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 191, 241–244 (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christina Olsén
    • 1
  • Fredrik Georgsson
    • 1
  1. 1.Intelligent Computing Group, Department of Computing ScienceUmeå UniversityUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations