Advertisement

Automatic Frame Selection Using MLP Neural Network in Ultrasound Elastography

  • Abdelrahman ZayedEmail author
  • Hassan Rivaz
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11663)

Abstract

Ultrasound elastography estimates the mechanical properties of the tissue from two Radio-Frequency (RF) frames collected before and after tissue deformation due to an external or internal force. This work focuses on strain imaging in quasi-static elastography, where the tissue undergoes slow deformations and strain images are estimated as a surrogate for elasticity modulus. The quality of the strain image depends heavily on the underlying deformation, and even the best strain estimation algorithms cannot estimate a good strain image if the underlying deformation is not suitable. Herein, we introduce a new method for tracking the RF frames and selecting automatically the best possible pair. We achieve this by decomposing the axial displacement image into a linear combination of principal components (which are calculated offline) multiplied by their corresponding weights. We then use the calculated weights as the input feature vector to a multi-layer perceptron (MLP) classifier. The output is a binary decision, either 1 which refers to good frames, or 0 which refers to bad frames. Our MLP model is trained on in-vivo dataset and tested on different datasets of both in-vivo and phantom data. Results show that by using our technique, we would be able to achieve higher quality strain images compared to the traditional methods of picking up pairs that are 1, 2 or 3 frames apart. The training phase of our algorithm is computationally expensive and takes few hours, but it is only done once. The testing phase chooses the optimal pair of frames in only 1.9 ms.

Keywords

Ultrasound elastography Frame selection Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) classifier Neural networks Principal component analysis (PCA) 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the principal investigators at Johns Hopkins Hospital Drs. E. Boctor, M. Choti and G. Hager for providing us with the in-vivo liver data.

References

  1. 1.
    Gennisson, J.L., Deffieux, T., Fink, M., Tanter, M.: Ultrasound elastography: principles and techniques. Diagn. Interv. Imaging 94(5), 487–495 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hall, T.J., et al.: Recent results in nonlinear strain and modulus imaging. Curr. Med. Imaging Rev. 7(4), 313–327 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hiltawsky, K.M., Krüger, M., Starke, C., Heuser, L., Ermert, H., Jensen, A.: Freehand ultrasound elastography of breast lesions: clinical results. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 27(11), 1461–1469 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jiang, J., Hall, T.J., Sommer, A.M.: A novel performance descriptor for ultrasonic strain imaging: a preliminary study. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 53(6), 1088–1102 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Foroughi, P., et al.: A freehand ultrasound elastography system with tracking for in vivo applications. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 39(2), 211–225 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kibria, M.G., Rivaz, H.: GLUENet: ultrasound elastography using convolutional neural network. In: Stoyanov, D., et al. (eds.) POCUS/BIVPCS/CuRIOUS/CPM -2018. LNCS, vol. 11042, pp. 21–28. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01045-4_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peng, B., Xian, Y., Jiang, J.: A convolution neural network-based speckle tracking method for ultrasound elastography. In: IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS), pp. 206–212 (2018)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rivaz, H., Boctor, E.M., Foroughi, P., Zellars, R., Fichtinger, G., Hager, G.: Ultrasound elastography: a dynamic programming approach. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 27(10), 1373–1377 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kingma, D., Ba, J.: Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. In: International Conference on Learning Representations, pp. 1–13 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chollet, F.: Keras (2015). https://github.com/fchollet/keras
  11. 11.
    Hashemi, H.S., Rivaz, H.: Global time-delay estimation in ultrasound elastography. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 64(10), 1625–1636 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zayed, A., Rivaz, H.: Fast approximate time-delay estimation in ultrasound elastography using principal component analysis. In: IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology \(41\)st Annual Conference (in press)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ophir, J., et al.: Elastography: ultrasonic estimation and imaging of the elastic properties of tissues. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. H 213(3), 203–233 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rivaz, H., Boctor, E.M., Choti, M.A., Hager, G.D.: Real-time regularized ultrasound elastography. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 30(4), 928–945 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, PERFORM CentreConcordia UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations